Paso Robles City Council on Tuesday unanimously denied a private developer's request to remove a large valley oak (Oak Tree 28) in the Olson South Chandler specific plan area, citing insufficient engineering and grading documentation and directing the applicant to pursue a specific-plan amendment before pursuing tree removal.

The council simultaneously approved an amendment to Operating Memorandum No. 1 of the Olson South Chandler development agreement that extends deadlines for a set of off-site traffic and infrastructure improvements tied to the project, after staff said the work remains under construction and requires more time to complete.

Council members framed the oak decision as a process and public-notice issue rather than a simple tree-preservation dispute. Darren Nash, the city planner presenting the removal request, told the council the applicant said the tree sits on a proposed borrow site the developer needs to provide about 45,000 cubic yards of dirt to balance other grading shortfalls across the large project. Nash said the requested borrows and the extent of mass grading were not shown in the approved specific plan and that staff lacked the detailed grading plans required to judge consistency with the specific plan.

The developer's project manager, Ashley, said the tree has been evaluated by the project's arborist and described Oak Tree 28 as “in decline and possess[ing] an increasing safety risk,” and said the company has planted mitigation trees and prepared designs they say would replace lost canopy. Arborist Lindy Althouse told the council the tree is stressed and isolated after prior grading and that, while it could remain for years, its health is uncertain; she recommended substantial replacement planting if removal were approved. Rick Engineering's Kelly Drews and landscape architect Bianca Koenig presented grading diagrams, cross sections, and conceptual renderings of new open space planting and trail connections if the knoll were lowered.

Councilmembers repeatedly said they did not have the engineering-level grading plans that would be required to show the mass grading's impacts on drainage, sightlines and PG&E easement infrastructure. Councilmember Tim Gregory summarized the concern: without a civil-engineering grading package, “I have real severe concern about removing a tree without a grading plan approved by the city.” Planning staff said applicants must submit grading plans and a specific-plan amendment (or show consistency with the existing entitlements) before the city could authorize the mass grading or issue tree-removal permits tied to that grading.

After discussion, Councilmember Fred Strong moved — and Mayor John Hammond seconded — to adopt the staff recommendation to deny the oak-removal permit at this time and direct the applicant to pursue the necessary specific-plan amendment and supporting technical documents. The motion passed unanimously: Strong, Hammond, Bausch, Beal and Gregory voted yes.

Separately, the council approved an amendment to Operating Memorandum No. 1 for the Olson South Chandler development agreement that adjusts timing for several traffic-related improvements the developer is obligated to construct. Community Development Director Warren Frase told the council that three signal/road projects remain under construction or otherwise delayed by design changes, supply-chain issues and contractor responsiveness; contractors told staff the expected completion dates are 12/01/2025 for the Thirteenth Street signals, 03/01/2026 for the Scott Street signal and 08/01/2026 for the Niblick Road/South River Road turn-lane and retaining-wall work.

Staff recommended authorizing the city manager to execute the amendment to avoid the developer falling out of compliance with the development agreement while the work is completed. The council approved the amendment unanimously; the vote record shows five ayes and no noes.

What changed and what’s next

- The council denied the removal request for Oak Tree 28 pending a completed civil-engineering package and demonstration of consistency (or an approved amendment) to the specific plan; removal remains possible later if the applicant follows the amendment and grading-permit process and the city finds the updated plans acceptable.
- The city approved a timing amendment for required traffic improvements so work under construction can continue and be reimbursed and tracked under the development agreement; staff said the signal projects remain on contractors’ timelines and are expected to be completed in 2025–2026.

The developer team said it will continue working with city staff; city planning staff said the next formal steps to change the specific plan would be an application with full grading plans, environmental review steps (addendum or other CEQA document as needed), public hearings at the planning commission and city council, and related coordination with utilities including PG&E.

Votes at a glance

- Oak tree removal (Oak Tree 28, Oak Tree Removal Permit 25-11): Motion to deny the permit passed unanimously (yes: Strong, Hammond, Bausch, Beal, Gregory). The denial instructs the applicant to pursue a specific-plan amendment and submit full grading plans if they wish to reapply.
- Amendment No. 2 to Operating Memorandum No. 1 (Olson South Chandler / Vigneto development agreement): Approved unanimously (yes: Strong, Hammond, Bausch, Beal, Gregory). Outcome: extended timelines for off-site signals and related infrastructure; city manager authorized to execute the amendment.

Proper names, clarifying details and context

- Project names: Olson South Chandler Specific Plan (also referred to as Vigneto / Veneto in staff materials). The project was approved as a specific plan with approximately 1,293 units and a development agreement governing public improvements and timing.
- Quantities: applicant seeks access to roughly 44,000–45,000 cubic yards of on-site material from the knoll under Oak Tree 28 to address a reported shortfall in earthwork balance across the project; total earthwork for the project is on the order of 150,000+ cubic yards and applicants reported shrinkage/compaction losses that increased import needs.
- Timeline estimate for a specific-plan amendment: staff estimated roughly 6–8 months from a complete application to hearings and council action, depending on the CEQA review required.

Speakers (attributed quotes in body are only from these speakers)

- Darren Nash, City Planner (city staff)
- Warren Frase, Community Development Director (city staff)
- Ashley (project manager, Olson Ranch / developer)
- Lindy Althouse, Arborist (Althouse & Mead)
- Kelly Drews, Civil Engineer (Rick Engineering)
- Bianca Koenig, Landscape Architect (Collective)
- Fred Strong, Councilmember (mover of tree denial)
- John Hammond, Mayor (second on tree denial)
- Tim Gregory, Councilmember
- Additional council members who voted: Councilmember Bausch, Councilmember Beal

Authorities referenced

- Olson South Chandler Specific Plan and its approved grading/entitlements (referenced by staff and developer during discussion) — referenced_by: ["oak tree removal discussion","operating memo amendment discussion"]

Actions array

- {"kind":"other","identifiers":{},"motion":"Deny oak tree removal permit 25-11 at this time; direct applicant to pursue a specific-plan amendment and submit full grading plans to demonstrate consistency before any tree removal permit is approved.","mover":"Fred Strong","second":"John Hammond","vote_record":[{"member":"Fred Strong","vote":"yes"},{"member":"John Hammond","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Bausch","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Beal","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Gregory","vote":"yes"}],"tally":{"yes":5,"no":0,"abstain":0},"legal_threshold":{"met":true,"notes":"Motion is a council discretionary action; approval requires majority."},"outcome":"approved","notes":"Council adopted staff recommendation to deny removal pending further application and specific-plan amendment."}

- {"kind":"other","identifiers":{},"motion":"Authorize city manager to execute Amendment No. 2 to Operating Memorandum No. 1 of the Olson South Chandler development agreement, adjusting timing for specified off-site traffic and on-site amenity improvements.","mover":"not specified","second":"not specified","vote_record":[{"member":"Fred Strong","vote":"yes"},{"member":"John Hammond","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Bausch","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Beal","vote":"yes"},{"member":"Gregory","vote":"yes"}],"tally":{"yes":5,"no":0,"abstain":0},"legal_threshold":{"met":true,"notes":"Consistent with development agreement amendment process"},"outcome":"approved","notes":"Amendment adjusts signal and turn-lane completion dates to contractor timelines; staff to continue coordination."}

Provenance

- transcript_segments: [{"block_id":"seg-9713","local_start":0,"local_end":300,"evidence_excerpt":"Yes, sir. Is is this mic working? Yep. Darren Nash, city planner. Mister mayor, members of the council, what's before you tonight is an oak tree removal, by Olson, 2 1 2.","reason_code":"topicintro"},{"block_id":"seg-13754","local_start":0,"local_end":60,"evidence_excerpt":"Council member Gregory? Aye. Motion passes unanimously.","reason_code":"topicfinish"}]