I support the appeal and oppose the removal of the healthy, native oak tree.
I have lived in Curtis Park for over 30 years. I was drawn to the neighborhood because of its beautiful mature trees and the strong, longtime commitment for the trees. When the rail yard was developed, Urban Forestry inspected this native oak and deemed it healthy, and the city required Petrovich development to preserve it. Why did Urban Forestry change its mind? In the recent storms, hundreds of trees blew over and hundreds more suffered limb failures, yet this oak survived without damage. Therefore, I urge you to support this request for appeal—there is no need to remove a healthy, native tree and it should be preserved.
Dear Hearing Officer,
As a Curtis Park resident I reside in this neighborhood because of the longtime, strong commitment for trees.The city required Petrovich development to preserve this native oak. Nothing has changed since Urban Forestry originally inspected and required its preservation. Why did Urban Forestry change their mind about this tree? The two recent catastrophic storms this past January where hundreds of trees blew over and hundreds more suffered limb failures did not severely damage this oak and therefore it should be preserved.
To the Hearing Officer:
One reason I live in Curtis Park is because my neighborhood realizes the value of our strong tree canopy in sustaining our health and welfare. The agreement between the city and Petrovich Development requires the preservation of the native oak that is the subject of this appeal. Nothing has changed since Urban Forestry inspected the tree originally and requested its preservation. Even the two recent catastrophic storms around New Years did not severely damage this oak. There is apparently no reason for the tree to be cut down. I request that the appeal be upheld and the tree be preserved.
Thank you for your consideration.
2417 Curtis Way
Sacramento, CA 95818