Street Trees on San Pablo Avenue: Berkeley is Leafy Green, Emeryville is Sun Blasted and Bleak

Emeryville's San Pablo Avenue Failure: 

Optimizing For Cars Means Fewer Trees 

Means Diminished Public Space 

Means Less Pedestrians 

Means Less Citizen Engagement

Means Less Local Economic Activity 

Means Civic Failure

Infrastructure of the 1995 San Pablo Avenue Beautification Project:
Street lights, bricks & ample left hand turn lanes.
Trees are allowed but not encouraged.

News Analysis

Twenty eight years ago, the City of Emeryville embarked on a visionary $4.1 million San Pablo Avenue Beautification Project, to create a pleasant pedestrian-centered boulevard out of a grimy and drab busy thoroughfare. Up the street in Berkeley, there was no big initiative, though it has always been a tree-lined road with a landscaped median; standard Berkeley stuff.  Here in Emeryville, all of San Pablo was reconfigured with the 1995 beautification project; a new raised median was added and many trees were planted.  Emeryville seemed to catch up with Berkeley, and then some; the project also included brick pavers on the sidewalks and pedestrian oriented street lamps.

Twenty eight years later, the trees (what’s left of them) have matured. Taking stock of our $1.4M infrastructure project--how have we done? We've failed– because, baked into the revitalization project was a guiding philosophy that beautification and pedestrian improvements shouldn't in any way impede traffic or commerce. The median is mostly the province of motor vehicles---long left turn pockets at each cross street.  Some take up the entire block, in both directions, leaving no trees at all. Other left turn pockets stretch half a block, leaving a two foot wide median, enough for a shrub or two, but not trees. 

The city also specifically chose species that remain small, so as not to hide billboards and signs on businesses, at the request of short-sighted local and national merchants. 

In Berkeley, sylvan, mature trees arch over San Pablo, forming a canopy in places. It's helped Berkeley attract locally serving retail shops to a place pedestrians linger, as if it were a destination in and of itself, not a corridor to a more pleasant place elsewhere---completing a virtuous cycle of good urban design.  Emeryville can’t seem to attract any locally serving retail on San Pablo Avenue without city subsidies, such as Arizmendi’s Bakery.  Here, we must provide financial assistance or risk our commercial spaces falling vacant or being gobbled up by fast food and national chain stores 

Compounding the lack of median trees in Emeryville, most of the trees planted in 1995 have since been replaced by saplings. Whenever developers remodel or replace a building, out come the chainsaws. City Hall allows this as despite our Urban Tree Ordinance, street trees aren't valued here.

So there you have it, clear to see. Travel the length of San Pablo Avenue from University Avenue in Berkeley to 39th Street in Emeryville.  But be sure to have your sunglasses handy when you reach Emeryville.  Here the street is sun blasted and hot in the summer while in Berkeley it's cool and shaded.  The divergent values can be easily seen with one transit.  One city prioritizes public space for pedestrians, the other for a swift vehicular pass through.

Street Optimized For Cars
Typical road diet in Emeryville: long left hand turn lanes, no room for trees.

Street Optimized For Pedestrians
Typical street scene on San Pablo Avenue in Berkeley.  Large trees on both sides reach over to
large trees in the median to make tree tunnels.  Not possible with long left hand turn lanes.

San Pablo Avenue in Berkeley: Dappled Sunlight, Pedestrian Friendly
It's much cooler than Emeryville and much more inviting for small locally serving retail shops.

Councilman Reveals Inept/Corrupt City Staff Regarding Trees at Biomed Project

 City Staff Bid Allowing Developer to Cut Trees

Ends With Bauters' Rebuke 

Information Hidden From Commissioners  

Council Member Pounces on Staff, Saves Trees

Council member John Bauters (on right)
He has a 'Loraxian' view of the urban forest but he's
thankfully, more effective than the actual Lorax.
Photo Lea Suzuki/SF Chronicle

Emeryville was on track heading into the February 25th Planning Commission meeting to allow the cutting of nearly 176 trees associated with Hollis Street's Biomed development proposal but for the actions of Councilman John Bauters who, citing a City statute that protects privately owned trees, forced the city staff  to save 90 trees following their initial recommendation for removal.   After the City Hall staff prepared their report that mistakenly gave the Commission a green light to kill the trees, Councilman Bauters, monitoring the Commission, wrote a February 24th email excoriating the staff for failing to reveal to the Commission their option to save the trees as is preserved in Emeryville’s municipal code.  

The Planning Commission, in response to Mr Bauters’ email, voted to save many of the trees that would have unnecessarily been cut down if they had listened to the staff.  A sharp eyed Councilman John Bauters, noting the error in the staff report, ultimately managed to save 90 trees from being cut outright but further got an agreement to plant more trees than what the staff had asked of the developer – 45 trees in all.

The tree cutting, as first presented by Emeryville Planning Director Charlie Bryant, forwarded Biomed's desire to cut down 22 public street trees associated with their development proposal as well as 154 trees on their property, as they had requested.  The public street trees are protected by Emeryville’s Urban Forestry Ordinance (UFO) but privately owned trees are not.  However, a section of the municipal code does provide some protection for privately owned trees in Emeryville but Mr Bryant failed to notify the Planning Commission of that. In the case of the proposed Biomed facility, the Planning Commission's hands are not tied as Mr Bryant indicated in his staff report but rather, the law does grant the Planning Commission an option to save the privately owned trees there.

Councilman Bauters, who is operating with the Biomed project as a private citizen due to proximity conflicts, quoted Emeryville Municipal Code Section 9-4.503(c) that outlines the process for the discretionary review of a project on private property involving existing trees.  Mr Bryant, in his staff report, did not reveal to the Planning Commission the following from 9-4.503(c):

“For projects on private property that require discretionary City approval, the Director, Planning Commission, or City Council, as the case may be, may require that existing healthy on-site trees be preserved and incorporated into the project unless this is shown to be infeasible.”

Mr Bauters, calling the omission “an appealable error”, stated the City of Emeryville had failed to consider the feasibility of preserving on-site trees.  He questioned the motives of the City for hiding information that could lead to saving trees adding, “from the beginning, the application has been presented, considered, debated and developed with the presumption that their preservation was a foregone conclusion.”

Emeryville's Biomed Center of Innovation™
View looking south at Hollis Street

The Planning Commission after receiving Council member Bauters’ email asked the staff to provide the information that had been denied them and upon receipt, they voted to save 77 of the private trees and they went on to insist 13 of the 22 proposed publicly owned street trees be saved, also at Mr Bauters’ request.  The staff had insisted underground pipes associated with the construction of the Biomed project would necessitate the cutting all 22 public trees, a conclusion the Council member showed to be false.  

Unfortunately, this is not the first time the City staff has ruled public street trees be cut in error.  There has been a pattern and practice of giving Emeryville’s decision makers false information that would rule in developers’ favor regarding cutting down our trees.  In 2018, the staff told the City Council that the developer of the Sherwin Williams project be allowed to cut some 14 trees, again owing to underground pipes; a falsehood revealed by the Tattler.  In that case, the staff hid a critical arborist report from the Planning Commission that they likely would have cited to save the trees. After a protracted public battle, the trees were mostly all saved. 

Mr Bauters also caught the staff falsely advising decision makers to cut publicly owned trees before the February 25th debacle.  In 2016, he managed to save 21 of 30 proposed tree removals associated with a PG&E pipeline renovation project on 53rd Street after the staff had told the Planning Commission to allow all 30 trees be cut.  The staff was forced to remove the agenda item at Council member Bauters’ behest after he demanded the legal agreements and maps showing pipeline proximity from PG&E.  Eventually, it was revealed that there was no agreement with the City as staff had claimed, and that the pipeline PG&E thought was under the sidewalk was in fact under the middle of the street.

The Tattler Presents the Document The City Doesn't Want You To See

To the Emeryville City Council:

Here's the Document Your Staff 

is Withholding From You

In a surprising turn of events, the Emeryville Planning Department has opted to withhold a critical document from the City Council as the Council decides whether to cut down publicly owned street trees on Horton Street, a move that is counter to the Department’s charge to provide pertinent and accurate information to the Council so they can make informed decisions. The document entitled Trees at Old Sherwin Williams Site, was written by SBCA Tree Consulting, the City’s official arborist and commissioned by the Council to determine the health of the street trees bordering the future Sherwin Williams apartment housing development. However the Planning Department feels the Council should not be able to see their own document as they decide the fate of the people’s street trees and so they have left it out of the packet slated for Tuesday’s Council meeting.  

Realizing the importance of transparency and objectivity in City Council decisions, especially those that impact the public’s assets so directly, the Tattler hereby presents to the City Council the document the Planning Department doesn’t want them to see.  

This valuable document will inform the Council the majority of the trees in question are found to be healthy, the opposite of what the staff told the Planning Commission at their March 15th meeting as reported by the Tattler on April 6th.

Even though they didn’t provide the document at the time, the Planning Department staff told the Planning Commission at the March 15th meeting, the health of the trees at the Sherwin site should be considered as that body weighed in on cutting them.  Another consideration brought to the Commission by the staff was whether there is room under the street to underground overhead utility wires or if they should put the wires under the sidewalk making saving the trees more expensive.  Regardless, the staff told the Planning Commissioners the health of the trees is not good and a majority of Commissioners used the poor health as the primary reason for their vote to cut the trees.  The staff never did inform the Planning Commission the arborist had found the trees to be healthy.  

The Planning Department staff has prepared their report for the City Council Tuesday advising them to cut all the trees but they once again have left out the document that proves the trees are healthy.  The newest arborist report the staff did include in the Council’s packet doesn’t report on the health of the trees but rather just gives their monetary value; money the developer normally would have to reimburse to the City as determined by Emeryville's Urban Forestry Ordinance but which the staff incidentally is recommending waiving.

Sherwin Street Trees Also

Informatively,  the Planning staff also recommended to allow the developer to cut down two existing trees on Sherwin Street, trees in no way impacted with under grounding of utility wires. At a December 14th 2017 Planning Commission meeting, the staff said the trees should be cut down regardless but in the case of these Sherwin Street trees, the reasons presented were: A more unified look could be had if all the new trees along the street were lollipops of the same size and species, better soil would be provided and that “significant sidewalk displacement” is presented by both trees (even though new sidewalks will be poured by the developer).  Working within a theme, the staff saw fit to leave out the fact that the official arborist report only noted “sidewalk uplift” with one tree, the other displaying “minor sidewalk uplift”.
Following staff's recommendation, in addition to the waiver of fees recommended for cutting the Horton Street trees, the Planning Commission also voted to cut down the trees on Sherwin Street and waive the fees that would normally be levied there as well.

It is hoped the City Council will make good use of their own arborist’s document meant to gauge the health of the trees the staff is recommending be cut down. 

From City Arborist Report 'Trees at the Old Sherwin Williams Site':
The staff says the decision makers should know about the health of the street trees but they told
them the trees are "unhealthy" regardless that 12 of the 14 in question are fair to good health.

Parkside Trees: Whatever Is Most Cost Effective?

Council Member Asher:

'Let's Do Whatever Is Most Cost Effective'

Council Members Davis & Brinkman:

'Let's Not'

Opinion
The Emeryville city council finally resolved the contentious Parkside tree issue last Tuesday night and their vote serves as a stand-in for all that ails our town; another reminder, as if you needed it, of who gets served by our City Hall and who gets left wanting.
Readers will remember the developer of the Parkside condominium project wants to cut down all the street trees surrounding the project site but residents rallied and convinced the council to change their earlier vote and save nine large mature trees along Stanford Street in what will be a future small park.  The council vote Tuesday was to save the nine trees but they specifically rejected saving them in the most cost effective manner.  Instead of saving the trees by just leaving them as they are, they opted instead to dig them up, place them in boxes and store them off site for a year or so until the park site is ready for replanting them.

Hope you like it-
it's going to cost you
a bundle.

The developer, Archstone Development Group expressed interest in cutting down all the trees as a way to save money...something or other about their profit.  But Council members Nora Davis and Kurt Brinkman suggested the developer's and the resident's desires both could be met by their plan to dig up and box the trees, a "good compromise" as Ms Davis called it.  The fact that Emeryville residents, not the developer would pay for digging up, boxing, storing and re-planting nine very large trees was left unmentioned Tuesday by the two council members.  It must have slippped their minds.

Council member Jac Asher had a better idea in mind; she motioned that Charlie Bryant, the Planning Director should determine which idea is the most cost effective; the save the trees where they are plan or the dig up and box the trees plan.  Mr Bryant would then oversee the more cost effective of the two.  Council member Ruth Atkin liked Ms Asher's motion and offered a second.  With mayor Jennifer West absent, the motion advanced where it died as a result of a NO vote from Nora Davis and Kurt Brinkman, the Broken Record Twins.

So now the city must pay to dig up the trees, store them and re-plant them because....well... Ms Davis and Mr Brinkman wouldn't say.  We think it has something to do with Archstone's desire for a greater profit.  It wouldn't be the first time for these two for this kind of vote and it won't likely be the last.

This harebrained tree idea of theirs is not a win-win...it's not a "good compromise"...it's just bad governance.  And once again the Broken Record Twins show us where their allegiance lays.

"Save the taxpayers
some money?"

"Not gunna do it!"

"No!"

Council Votes: Nine Parkside Trees Saved

Parkside Trees To Be Dug Up And Temporarily Stored Elsewhere

The Emeryville city council voted Tuesday night to save nine of the 33 most contentious trees slated to be killed to make way for the Parkside condominium project.  The housing development project raised the ire of Emeryville residents when the city staff and the developer conspired to kill every existing street tree to ease construction of the project.

The Parkside Condominiums will look like
other housing projects in Emeryville
completed in the last 15 years.

Residents were especially dismayed by the prospects of cutting down 33 mature trees along Stanford Street in what is to be a small park adjacent and associated with the project, as widely reported by The Secret News.  The city council responded to residents complaints by scheduling Tuesday's reconsideration of an earlier green light to start cutting by the council.

The new plan now as approved by the council is to dig up and temporarily pot the nine trees in large boxes and store them off site.  The trees would later be re-planted in roughly the same spot at the new park upon completion of the project.  The arborist associated with the project has determined the nine mature trees to be saved as "good", the highest rating.

All of the other street trees on the city block circumscribed by Powell, Doyle, Stanford and Hollis streets either have already been killed or will be to make construction of the project easier.  The nation-wide condominium developer, Archstone, has done other housing projects in the Bay Area including the Archstone Apartments on Shellmound Street in Emeryville.