This tree was loved and adored and dressed up and loved and cherished and admired and loved and lived a longer healthier life than most any of its kind.
What more could a tree ask for?
Don't be sad over what is gone, rejoice in how much it gave you while it was here.

Well done tree, and thank you.

Interesting how priorities are assigned, there is a Canary Island Pine tree in Parking Lot 9 along the parkway that is older, taller and in worse condition than the Cedar tree at City Hall. The Canary Island Pine tree has been horribly mangled by utility companies over the years to make way for the utility lines along View Street. Clearly a danger to nearby homes, condo's, pedestrians and vehicles in the parking lot. Had this tree been located at City Hall, it would have been removed long ago. I'm guessing the tree would be very expensive to take down, the city would prefer it to fall down and deal with the liability later. At least city hall workers are safe with the Cedar being removed. Arborist opinions differ by who is asking for an opinion. Reminds me of the Japanese garden at Pioneer Memorial Park that required the removal of some "unhealthy" trees, meanwhile calls to the city regarding the Canary Island Pine are ignored.

Here's the process for appealing a heritage tree removal:
Web Link

Appealing the removal of a rotten tree is akin to appealing the removal of a dangling piano on a rotten rope suspended above people.

"At least city hall workers are safe with the Cedar being removed."

As will the hundreds of people who gather under it for the multiple holiday fairs and ceremonies, and the hundreds who fill the plaza for theater events as well as the people and children who play in the fountain next to it and plus the dozens who literally stand under it daily.

Given the number of possible victims at risk, this should quite rightly be a priority over a parking lot tree. I hope you're seeing the bigger picture now.

Good. Ugly dying tree needs to be cut down.

MV-Voice article from 2016:
"Dry and dying from drought, trees to be chopped down and replaced"
Web Link

I'm not sure why current article claims that "tree was likely dealt a setback in the early 1990s" and does not mention that "city officials say they have been prohibited from irrigating the trees" as in article from 2016.

Yes, I remember this wonderful tree, as I pushed my dear little son (now 27) in his stroller under its mighty branches on our way to/from the little yogurt shop on a nearby street corner. What memories! I would like to echo the words of a previous contributor by simply reiterating: Thank you, Tree - and adding: You will be remembered and always loved.......

@PhD:

If you read the comments in the article you linked to, you would see a more careful explanation of the 2016 situation.

The city was specifically prohibited from irrigating the ornamental grass in the median. Because the grass and the tree occupied the same area, the trees suffered as a consequence of the regulation.

"If you read the comments in the article you linked to, you would see a more careful explanation of the 2016 situation."

So...... the city has been prohibited from irrigating the tree. Right?

@zap:

"So...... the city has been prohibited from irrigating the tree. Right?"

Incorrect.

If you READ THE ARTICLE, the city has tried many irrigation techniques on the stricken cedar (5th paragraph).

While drought rules were in effect, irrigating standalone trees was permitted. Trees planted amidst ornamental grass were not allowed to be irrigated using the installed sprinkler system. Spot irrigation would have been acceptable for the stricken cherry trees in the center median but that method was not employed.

Note that these rules were in effect for government property. There was never any outright ban of residential irrigation during the drought years although irrigation was only allowed on certain days by area and excess water runoff could be cited for a violation.

If I recall correctly, the city continued to water certain recreational lawns in some city parks. In those cases, the grass was not considered ornamental; healthy grass was necessary for safety reasons because of the intended use of those particular areas.

Came here to find people complaining about the tree removal who didn't real the whole article.

Was not disappointed.

Good riddance!

That tree is awful looking and always has been. They should have planted a new CHRISTMAS tree in the Castro median when the old one was mistakenly cut down THIRTY YEARS AGO. Could you imagine how big it would be now??? It’s now time for a proper “holiday” tree (to be properly PC) to replace that nasty old thing and it will fit very nicely with the now ubiquitous GSSV holiday market every December in civic center plaza.

On another note, maybe we could transplant one of the giant Redwoods that were “saved” on Sierra to City Hall?

I think it's funny how some people get angry at trees :)

Don't think you're off the hook you rocks, and shrubbery, your days are numbered as well.
Good riddance to you all! MEH! MMMMEH!!!!!

LOL :)