Oak Avenue EV charger project moves forward; tree removals prompt "lessons learned" discussion

City staff described design and permitting for an Oak Avenue parking‑lot electric vehicle charging project on Sept. 9, telling the Saint Helena City Council the vendor expects to install 11 level‑3 chargers (described by staff as Tesla dock‑style chargers), add a single ADA van space and reconfigure 12 parking spaces — alterations that required removing existing landscaping and several trees.

Interim manager Leach said the vendor's plans require conduits and additional drive‑aisle width, and that moving the northern curb closer to the building left no feasible option to retain the trees at the head of parking stalls. "The reason why the landscaped areas are being removed is because they're actually moving the northern parking curb closer to the property line ... so the landscaping goes away to account for both the chargers and the increased depth in parking stalls and drive‑aisle width," Leach said.

Leach also told council the project is governed by state legislation he referenced in the meeting as "AB 20 12 20 12 36," which he said restricts local agencies' discretion to condition vendor projects; under that law, he said, the city can deny the project only if a specific adverse public‑health or safety impact is shown.

Council member Barrick asked whether alternative parking configurations or different planter layouts could have preserved trees; Leach said reconfiguring the planters parallel to stall depth might have been possible, but not in the location where the chargers and conduit were required. "If I were to Monday‑morning quarterback ... could we have come back and said install the finger planters? Probably," Leach said. He added, however, that the project appears well into construction mobilization and that it may be "too far" to materially change the contractor's work without negotiation.

Leach and several council members discussed "lessons learned" including earlier community engagement with adjacent property owners and stronger contract conditions requiring post‑construction beautification. Staff said notification was provided for the trees and that the trees in question were not heritage trees under municipal code; Leach said the city will work on future approaches to condition projects so they leave sites "better than they received."

The project has completed a plan review and encroachment‑permit process, and staff said the vendor is required to meet PG&E requirements and other permitting obligations. Leach said the city issued an encroachment permit and reviewed plans; the installation will include significant conduit work and asphalt removal to accommodate the chargers. He showed council slides with the layout and explained that conduit needs drove much of the demolition footprint.

Ending: Council members expressed support for moving the EV project forward while asking staff to continue trying to negotiate mitigation or beautification measures with the vendor and adjacent property owners. No formal action or vote on the EV project was taken at the Sept. 9 meeting; staff said it would apply lessons learned to future projects and return with opportunities to involve the heritage‑tree committee or adjacent property owners earlier in the process.