City Responds to Post on Damage to Torrey Pine on Greene Street

by on October 13, 2016 · 4 comments

in Environment, Ocean Beach

ob-torrey-ebers-truknsignThe OB Rag just received the following email in response to our post, “Did the City Just Damage Another Torrey Pine With a Street Repair?”

Here is the email from Anthony Santacroce, Senior Public Information Officer for City of San Diego
Communications, in which he requests that we publish the city statement:

Mr. Gormlie,

In response to your blog post from yesterday, please see below:

A City concrete repair team responded to multiple community requests to replace a lifted slab of concrete adjacent to a Torrey pine on Greene Street in Ocean Beach. In order to maintain the health and well-being of the tree, a City horticulturalist was engaged in the process prior to the performance of work and through its completion. Except for minor removal of small surface roots, no pruning or cutting was performed and the roots system remains intact. The work is now complete and the fresh concrete slab will be curing (drying) for the next seven days. The tree is healthy and the broken, hazardous section of Greene Street is now repaired.

I would kindly request that you amend or correct the post – perhaps publish the above City statement – to provide a more balanced and factual narrative along with the assertions already put forth.

Please don’t hesitate to contact me for more information and context.

Thank you,
Anthony Santacroce
Senior Public Information Officer
City of San Diego
T (619) 533-4509
C (619) 602-2805


{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }

retired botanist October 13, 2016 at 5:27 pm

Thanks, OB Rag, for your original coverage of the story and for updating it with the City’s response. Given that this is one of several Torrey pines recently nominated for status as a Heritage Tree, the community’s concern is understandable, and so its encouraging that paying attention is worthwhile for everyone. The City’s statement on the nature of the work is appreciated, and reflects, in part, the kind of prompt dialog the community wants to see regarding not only its trees, but all matters related to its Community Plan.


Geoff Page October 14, 2016 at 11:25 am

The only thing that puzzles me is the “multiple community requests” part. As I said in my comment on the story, this was not much of a bump at all, I’ve jogged over it for many years, I’m surprised there were multiple requests. And, despite the requests, I’m surprised the city responded when there are so many other areas that need more urgent attention. This is a nice little street but not one that represents great wealth like other areas of Pt. Loma. The sidewalk by this tree already had a metal bridge so it wasn’t a sidewalk problem. Maybe The Rag could ask how many requests the city received to fix the street, and when.


retired botanist October 14, 2016 at 1:11 pm

yes, I agree. It seems very odd to me that this particular piece of road was on the City’s docket, especially given the heavily deteriorated road and sidewalk conditions in other parts of OB…And I’m especially curious to know if the request came from the 2269 Ebers St. property.
I would also like to understand better how the prioritizing of community requests works….if we’d had a better sense of that we might have been successful in saving one or more of the trees on Saratoga. It was quite obvious that the tree at 4652 Saratoga was in far better shape than others around the district, yet it went to an unnecessary “red alert” status based, seemingly, on complaints from a single resident.


nostalgic October 14, 2016 at 7:46 pm

“Get it Done!” logs all requests on the city web site, but I did not find one for Greene Street. Ebers is full of request for tree stuff, though, and is the busiest for Get it Done requests.


Leave a Comment

Older Article:

Newer Article: