Key Discussion Points from the November 16, 2021 City Council Meeting The following summarizes outstanding questions from City Council and provides responses:
1. What all is included in the City’s urban forestry program? Who is responsible for this work?
➢ The program includes planting, maintenance, and removal of public trees, and review of applications to remove private protected trees. This work is accomplished by a combination of City staff in the Planning and Public Works departments, Canopy staff and volunteers, and contracted tree care services.
In addition, the future program will ideally include more outreach and engagement around tree care and protection issues.
2. Council agreed that the City should take responsibility for maintaining public trees, rather than having private property owners take on responsibilities. The main concern was whether City staff can manage the increased workload, and what the overall staffing and budget implications of the recommendations add up to? ➢ City staff suggest hiring an on-call arborist to supplement City staff capacity and lack of this expertise on staff.
➢ After surveying other cities in San Mateo County, most other cities that didn’t have an in-house arborist who does both plan review, as well as site inspections, suggested hiring a consultant that could be on-call and billed directly to the private property owner.
➢ For tree removal permits and landscaping plans for larger developments, we could consider asking the applicant to hire a certified arborist and provide a report to the City (almost like an affidavit) that states that the project landscape plans conforms to our UFMP and Development Code.
3. The City used to have a staff member in the Planning Department who had an arborist certification. What is the cost and feasibility of training up existing staff to have the appropriate expertise?
➢ City staff education on tree care issues and standards is common - 79% of cities nationally that are similar in size to East Palo Alto have staff attend tree care workshops, and 60% have an ISA certified arborist on staff (via Hauer & Peterson, 2016, Municipal Tree Care and Management in the United States:
A 2014 Urban & Community Forestry Census of Tree Activities). Some education and training of current City staff is needed to ensure understanding of the protections and responsibilities included in the tree ordinances, though it would likely be less efficient for the City to train existing staff in arboriculture than to hire a staff arborist or work with a qualified consultant. Investing in a certification for existing staff leaves the City open to losing access to this expertise if the staff member chooses to leave, as happened previously.
4. If the City doesn’t have an arborist on staff, who can help with questions and with the urban forestry workplan?
➢ The City could include consulting services in the current pruning contract to ensure expert review is available when City staff have a question about tree removal permit approvals or workplan details. Alternatively, the City could pursue a small contract or other relationship with an arborist independent of the pruning contract.
5. Does the City’s urban forestry budget include funds for sidewalk repair related to tree root damage?
➢ No not currently. The Public Works Department is taking into account repairs and maintenance in the public right-of-way, and things like creating a grid pruning schedule will help avoid the overgrowing of some public street trees that up root the sidewalk.
6. There are already three ordinances related to tree maintenance and protection in the city, and there is confusion about them. How will this process improve the current situation?
➢ In response to this concern, we propose combining two of the ordinances pertaining to public trees into a single ordinance, and expanding each of the ordinances to include all important components.
7. How would parking lot shading requirements apply and how would they impact existing parking lots?
➢ The proposed ordinance language in Chapter 18.30.090 will help refine parking lot design standards with the addition of a new section (under “D” Landscaping), added to cover Parking lot shade. This new part will be revised to read: “4) Parking lot shade. No less than 50% of a paved parking lot shall be shaded with tree canopies within 15 years of obtaining a building permit or certificate of occupancy.” Further specifications on the plantings are outlined in the proposed ordinance update. These provisions would not apply retroactively, and would be implemented during the design review process.
8. The current tree protection ordinance does not seem to be well followed or enforced.
Could the City shift resources to allow for code enforcement on the weekends? Could the City educate police officers such that they can record any tree ordinance violations they observe on the weekends and report it to the code enforcement office?
➢ Shifting code enforcement to weekends is a promising approach to reduce violations of the tree protection ordinance. This will require staff to evaluate available overtime for code enforcement officers and how other priorities beyond trees should be addressed during this weekend enforcement time.
One option is to set a private, rotating schedule for enforcement on select weekends to reduce the total number of hours required while increasing enforcement.
➢ In our experience and research, use of police officers to enforce tree protection policies has not been successful in other communities. Police are generally focused on crime, not on tree issues. Additionally, in many places officers have an adversarial relationship with community members, which leads to a lack of trust and degrades the community relationship with the City, an issue the project team is working to resolve with this project. ➢ We do not support the use of police officers for assistance with tree related issues. The project team recommends increasing code enforcement staffing or increasing staff capacity to write citations for tree related issues on weekends and during the week. Additionally, we recommend that there be a dedicated line and email address for community members to call or email to report a violation.
➢ Before enforcement can increase, a community engagement effort is needed to ensure that community members are aware of the protections in place through the current or revised tree protection ordinance. Accurate information should be readily available through the City website.
9. How can the community get involved in tree planting efforts? ➢ Canopy is currently involved in tree planting in East Palo Alto, and works with volunteers to plant trees locally. Community members can volunteer, or can sign up to receive a tree to plant on their property via the Canopy website:
https://canopy.org/our-work/tree-planting/branching-out/
10.Is becoming a Tree City USA something the City can afford to prioritize given limited resources? Planting and maintenance of trees could be a better priority right now, without adding additional administrative burden.
➢ The requirements for becoming a Tree City USA will be met if other recommendations are followed, without needing substantial additional action or investment. Therefore, we see obtaining this designation as a good option for the City to show a commitment to the urban forest.
■ Standard 1 - A Tree Board Or Department. The recommended updates to the public tree ordinance will designate responsibility for public trees as held by the Department of Public Works, meeting this requirement.
A tree board would be an additional, but optional, action. ■ Standard 2 - A Tree Care Ordinance. The recommended updates to the public tree ordinance will set standards of care.
■ Standard 3 - A Community Forestry Program With an Annual Budget of at Least $2 Per Capita. The current budget is already sufficient. ■ Standard 4 - An Arbor Day Observance and Proclamation. An Arbor Day proclamation can be issued to note activities already conducted with Canopy.
➢ Applying to become a Tree City USA and maintaining this status is not expected to take very much staff time. We would expect a needed 40 hours per year to gather and report out on tree care and removal information, fill out required forms, and coordinate with the program.
➢ It may be most appropriate to adopt changes to the urban forestry program over the next year, and then re-evaluate at that time whether the City wishes to pursue Tree City USA status in recognition of its work.
11.What does forming a tree board mean? Could it be part of an existing public body, how much time would it take, and what are the requirements? Who would be part of these meetings and when would they happen?
➢ ArborDay defines this requirement for becoming a Tree City USA as follows:
■ “STANDARD 1: A Tree Board or Department
Someone must be legally responsible for the care of all trees on city- or town-owned property. By delegating tree care decisions to a professional forester, arborist, city department, citizen-led tree board or some combination, city leaders determine who will perform necessary tree work. The public will also know who is accountable for decisions that impact community trees. Often, both professional staff and an advisory tree board are established, which is a good goal for most communities.
The formation of a tree board often stems from a group of citizens.
In some cases a mayor or city officials have started the process.
Either way, the benefits are immense. Involving residents and business owners creates wide awareness of what trees do for the community and provides broad support for better tree care.” ➢ The proposed hearings and appeals processes recommended in the revised ordinance text designates the Director’s Hearing as a forum for sharing treerelated information and issues with the public. It also designates Planning Commission as the body responsible for hearing appeals of the Director’s decision. Director’s Hearings would be an additional meeting to plan and schedule, but would occur only when requested. Over the first year of implementing these changes the City will be able to evaluate their impact on staff time and make any adjustments necessary. At this time, it is unknown how often tree removal permit applications will be appealed or questioned, triggering these meetings.
12.The City is working to address issues about water security and flooding, which should be recognized in the Plan. First reach has been completed to protect the Gardens area. Purchased rights from Mountain View and Palo Alto gave rights for water, and have access to well water. The City does have enough water. ➢ We have added text in Chapter 2 to address the City’s work on sea wall construction to address flood risk, and on water rights and options to address future water availability.