Neighbors Fight to Keep Tree from being Chopped Down

By George McConnell

A dispute similar to the one that recently shook the UC Berkeley campus is pitting PG&E against a group of neighbors in the Outer Sunset District. There are no tree sitters yet, and just the fate of one tree hangs in the balance, but the final curtain in the fray might come crashing down literally as well as figuratively on Nov. 11.

The central character is an 85-year-old Phoenix Canariensis, or "canary palm" tree, such as those that grace the Embarcadero and Market Street. It sits adjacent to a house once owned by Mayor James "Sunny Jim" Rolph, who used it as a beach house. It is believed he planted the tree, according to Evelyn Robert, who owns the house and has lived there for the past 16 years.

The surrounding neighborhood, just three blocks from Ocean Beach, is nearly treeless, and area residents are attached to the tree, regarding it as something of a landmark.

"There aren't many trees in the Sunset, and no other palm trees, so it's a rarity. Birds build their nests in it and on occasion we've even had a wild parrot," Robert said.

PG&E, however, isn't quite as enamored with the tree. It has gone before the Department of Public Works twice requesting it be removed, saying the palm's long, sharp fronds are interfering with its overhead power lines. "They say it is a public hazard, but they've been trimming it for many years, and as far as I know, there have never been any problems, so why now?" Robert said.

For their part, PG&E claims allowing the tree to grow and be pruned is not an option.

In an attempt to save the tree, Robert and a group of neighbors banded together, forming a committee called "Save The Tree At '73," which refers to her home address. The petition they passed around the neighborhood garnered 75 signatures.

This has resulted in a face-off, but Robert is still very much out on a limb. In its ruling issued on June 23, the Department of Public Works gave her 120 days to exercise one of three options: move the tree to a new location or install a "bundled cable" around the tree, both of which would be at her expense, or let PG&E cut the tree down, which the utility would pay for.

"They will only cut down to the stump and I will have pay to have the stump and roots removed," she said.

Robert said a "bundled cable" is their preferred option. It would solve the hazard created by the fronds and save the tree, but at a cost of between $8,000 and $10,000, it is too expensive.

"PG&E has not offered to work with us in any way on this, and undergrounding the power lines is not scheduled for this neighborhood for many years," she said.

The option to move the tree is also a long shot. The Bureau of Urban Forestry has estimated the survival rate at only 50 percent. And then there is the question of finding a new location.

"It's expensive and noisy, and it would involve taking the lines down, jack hammering into the sidewalk, digging up the root ball, and impeding traffic around here for several days. There would be a lot of bad blood created between PG&E and the area residents - especially if the tree were to die in its new location," Robert said.

Thus far, she and her committee have been unsuccessful in attracting outside help in their fight. Getting anybody at PG&E to talk to them has been difficult, she said, and calls placed to Supervisor Carmen Chu's office have gone unreturned. The Bureau of Urban Forestry seems to have abandoned them as well.

"Initially, they were very supportive and said they would help us, but it seems we've been dropped as they aren't returning our calls," she said.

Although the final bell hasn't rung yet, Robert's options are dwindling, and PG&E ultimately holds the trump card. The June ruling gave PG&E the right to exercise the default action of removing the tree if the matter is still unresolved by Nov. 10. At this point, she can sign an order and let PG&E pay to remove the tree. If she refuses to sign, she will get the bill, because as owner of the property she is legally responsible for the tree. Robert says she plans to request another hearing on the matter.