Uproot a tree — or upend a new theater? SLO council mourns ‘tragedy of errors’
A single stately oak tree threw a surprise wrinkle into San Luis Obispo’s long-anticipated new $21.5 million performing arts theater this week.
And it forced the City Council to make a decision no one was happy about.
On Tuesday, the council heard a request to remove a large coast live oak at the corner of Monterey and Nipomo streets downtown as part of ongoing development of San Luis Obispo Repertory Theatre’s new complex.
The problem? Planners had previously said the city-owned tree, which was estimated to be between 65 and 96 years old, would not be impacted by the development.
Now the council was tasked with deciding to remove the tree or push for a redesign of the site, which would delay the longstanding theater project and potentially threaten its overall viability.
Councilmembers Tuesday night were far from thrilled at having to make the decision.
“We were always assured that the tree would do fine all the way through,” Councilmember Jan Marx said during discussion. “I really sympathize with SLO Rep’s situation, and I’m a big supporter of SLO Rep, as they know, but I feel that the city really is responsible. The city failed to insist that the project be designed in such a way that the tree could be preserved.”
Marx went on to say that she felt “mournful and sad” about the loss of the tree and the position the council was put in.
She later was the sole “no” vote on removing the tree, though she noted it was mostly a symbolic vote amid a “tragedy of errors.”
Why does downtown SLO tree need to be removed?
So what happened?
According to a city staff report, when the new theater’s final design was approved in 2019, the tree at 614 Monterey St. was expected to be preserved.
Unfortunately, at that time it wasn’t clear that the 45-foot-tree’s root structure was much bigger than anticipated and extended throughout the SLO Rep site, according to the report.
Its roots have also already been impacted by frontage road improvements as part of the nearby Cultural Arts District Parking Structure, which is slated to open in March.
As planned, roughly 86% of the tree’s critical root zone would be impacted by the new theater’s construction and 35% of the tree’s canopy would need to be removed, the report said.
An arborist in June 2025 concluded that the tree itself was in “fair condition” — a middle-of-the-road designation of the tree’s health — but that it would not survive such significant impacts.
As a result, it was recommended the tree be removed and a Mandela’s Coral tree be planted onsite in the same area, as well as four other trees along Nipomo Street.
City arborist Walter Gault on Tuesday described the proposed replanting plan as “robust” saying it was in excess of the city’s normal replanting guidelines.
He also supported the independent arborist’s conclusion that the theater’s design, as is, would negatively impact the tree’s health.
“As this project is currently drawn, it does not allow for adequate space to protect the tree’s critical roots,” Gault said. “Without sufficient roots to sustain the tree, it will not be a long-term viable feature to the project.”
Gault also noted that leaving the tree in place could result in “some unintended consequences” when down the road it does eventually have to be removed.
A project representative also noted that though specific information on whether the tree could be moved somewhere else was not available, he felt confident that “it’s probably not going to make it” if they tried.
City Council approves tree removal
During discussion, councilmembers shared their sadness at losing the handsome tree — and several bemoaned having to be in the position to vote do so.
“I agree with the shock and awe of this moment,” Mayor Erica Stewart said. “It was definitely not the plan. We look at the renderings. We hear the conversation. We continued wanting to build around this tree. It is a beautiful large tree and a part of our community, and I’m very disheartened we couldn’t figure this out.”
Councilmember Mike Boswell said looking back, it seems like the tree was “doomed” as soon as the plan to build the nearby Cultural Arts District Parking Structure joined with SLO Rep’s plan for a new theater.
“We should have had procedures in place at that time to look at a tree like this more in advance,” he said. “We did not. That’s unfortunate.”
Boswell said now the city is “too far down the road with both the parking garage and SLO Rep” to be able to do anything about the tree.
“Again, this is a decision that we should have had in front of us five, eight, 14, 22 years ago so that we could have done some long-term planning around both the design of the garage itself, and then ultimately the SLO Rep,” he said. “But that’s simply not an option any longer.”
Councilmember Michelle Shoresman meanwhile echoed the council’s comments about being saddened by the loss of the tree, saying “we are a council and community that cares for our trees very much.”
“I am torn because I’m concerned that saving the tree right now in the short term could lead to losing a theater that many, many people have been working on for a very long time, and have tried to make accommodations for with the information they had,” she said. “Could we have done better? Clearly there’s a potential we could have done better, but we couldn’t know what we didn’t know, unfortunately, in this situation.”
Ultimately, after roughly an hour of presentations and deliberation, the council voted 4-1 to remove the tree.
As Councilmember Emily Francis put it: “I think just based on what we’ve heard about the science, there isn’t really a path where preserving the site with the tree makes sense.”
%20Cropped.jpg)