Carmel Forest and Beach Commission approves conditional removal of coast live oak at Santa Fe and Fifth

The Carmel-by-the-Sea Forest and Beach Commission voted 3–2 to conditionally approve removal of a significant coast live oak at the southeast corner of Santa Fe and Fifth to allow a home addition, with the condition that the applicant pay for replanting a replacement tree in a nearby city right-of-way and that the Planning Commission approve the project design.

Justin, the city forester, told commissioners the staff recommendation was to deny the removal but outlined the permit history and the tree assessment. "The recommendation staff is bringing you is to deny the removal of this oak for the purpose of construction," he said, citing the city's tree code findings and noting the tree is mature and in good health.

The applicant's architect, Adam Jeselnik, spoke for property owner Elizabeth Gonzales and described a modest project of a small entry addition, a kitchen deck addition and a bathroom that would encroach on the tree canopy. Jeselnik said the owners have lived in the house about two years and are seeking interior modernization and modest added square footage. He said the deck currently is built around the tree and that the owners were considering removal because of light impacts and limbs over the roof.

Public commenters including Melanie and Linda urged preservation of oaks and noted the city's broader forest management priorities. One commenter said the tree is significant and that the general plan and tree code emphasize preservation; another said property owners are encouraged to build smaller to protect trees.

Commissioners debated conservation value versus homeowner impacts and future safety. Several commissioners noted the parcel is heavily forested (about 14 lower-canopy oaks on site) and observed that the subject tree is among the largest on the lot and likely 50'70 years old. Others said the tree's proximity to the house raised reasonable concerns for the property owner's long-term use and potential future hazards. Commissioner discussion also referenced alternatives such as redesigning second-floor elements to avoid the tree and the variance process for setbacks.

A motion to allow removal with conditions passed. The motion recorded a 3'2 vote: Commissioners Burling, the chair (transcribed variably as Rosowski/Brzozowski), and Mickey voted yes; Commissioners Jerry and Bridal voted no. The motion as recorded required a replacement tree planted at the applicant's expense in a nearby city right-of-way and made approval contingent on Planning Commission review of the project design. The commission also discussed in-lieu and maintenance requirements for city-planted trees, noting in one exchange that the city's standard in-lieu fee ("in Luffy" in the record) covers five years of maintenance and is roughly $800.

The commission returned the application to the Planning Commission for design review with the removal condition; commissioners said they expected planning-level review to examine alternatives and any required variances.

The commission's action will allow the property owner to pursue the design process with Planning Commission review; the tree removal itself remains conditioned on that subsequent approval.