2026
NAPA URBAN FORESTRY
A CEMENT RAN MANAGEMENT PLAN
PARTICIPATING NAPA
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS COMMUNITY MEMBERS
CITY OF NAPA PLANNING TEAM CITY PARTNERS
• Jeff Gittings, Parks and Urban Forestry Manager • Parks and Recreation Services • Ali Koenig, Parks Project Manager • Public Works (Construction, Engineering, Private Projects, • Breyana Brandt, Parks and Recreational Services Director Public Projects, Operations, and Utilities) • John "Woody" Hedderman, Urban Forestry Supervisor • Economic Development (Long Range Policies, Climate, Planning) • Samuel Glenn, Park Maintenance Worker III • Risk Management • Participating Stakeholders
• Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District STEERING COMMITTEE - • Parks, Recreation, and Trees Advisory Commission COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT • Napa County Public Works
City of Napa Project Team CONSULTING TEAM
• Jeff Gittings, Parks and Urban Forestry Manager
• Ali Koenig, Parks Project Manager
• Amber Krebbers, Regional Manager
Napa Resource Conservation District • Rachael Sitz, Senior Associate Consultant • Frances Knapczyk, Program Director, Community • Maegan Blansett, Associate Consultant Engagement and Agriculture • Ryan Veiga, Associate Consultant • Ashley Kvitek, Senior Project Manager, Volunteers • Anne Fenkner, Business Developer • Monique "Mo" Byro, Project Manager, • Will Ayersman, Project Manager Community Engagement • Shelby Loy, Senior GIS Analyst
NAPA FUNDING PARTNER
RCD
Funding for the City of Napa Urban
Forestry Management Plan has been
CAL
provided by the State General Fund as FIRE
administered by the California Department SINCE 1895
ITY O DAVEY
SADL of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE)
Resource Group Urban and Community Forestry Program.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Section 1 Section 4
WHAT DO WE HAVE? 07 HOW ARE WE DOING? 53
TABLE OF CONTENTS
About Napa 07 Measuring Progress 53
Napa's Trees 09 Conclusion 54
01 Tree Inventory and Resource Analysis Summary 17
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 21
Napa's Urban Forest Management APPENDICES 55
Planning Process Section 2
55 WHAT DO WE WANT? 31 57
INTRODUCTION 03 B. Budget Benchmarking
C. Ordinance Matrix 57
Community and Stakeholder Engagement 31 D. Sustainability Indicators Tables 63 Importance of Trees 03 Issues, Opportunities, Themes, and Priorities 33 E. Community Survey Responses 69 Plan Purpose and Vision 05
How to Use This Plan 06 Section 3
HOW DO WE GET THERE? 37
Goals and Recommendations 37
37 Action and Implementation
-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PLANNING PROCESS Over their lifespans, Napa's trees have collectively removed 325,670 tons of carbon from the atmosphere, valued at $15.1 million. And each year, they provide quantifiable benefits This 40-year Urban Forestry Management Plan ("Plan") totaling more than $2.7 million-including: 225,780 pounds of benchmarks the current urban forest conditions and provides a pollutants removed. 52.9 million gallons of stormwater roadmap toward the urban forest of the future, guided by the intercepted and absorbed. 4,500 tons of carbon dioxide (CO,) community, managing partners, City staff, and best management sequestered. In addition to their environmental benefits, trees practices in urban forestry. support physical and mental health, increase property values, reduce energy costs, lower crime rates, and help create more What do we have?
successful business districts.
Napa is a vibrant and modern community with respect for its colorful past. A popular tourist destination, the city is built along Management of Napa's Urban Forest the Napa River and adjoining creeks and channels. The remnant Napa's urban forestry maintenance and enhancement is native oak trees and restored riparian habitat provide the primarily led by staff in the Parks and Recreation Services community with a strong human-connection to nature. Planted Department and private property owners. The City of Napa is trees line the streets, surround homes and buildings, and are responsible for the care of downtown street trees, trees in scattered throughout the park system. These trees make up the landscape medians, trees located at City facilities, and park trees. urban forest and are relied upon by the community each day. The City also plants trees in public spaces; working with property owners adjacent to street trees to determine the desired species Napa's Trees and provide information on routine maintenance. Adjacent The City of Napa conducted a land cover assessment in 2024 to property owners are responsible for street tree maintenance capture an aerial view of the city's tree canopy and other land (tree pruning, tree removal, stump removal, and coordination cover. This assessment approximated 21.5% canopy cover in during replacement planting). The Department uses a tree Napa. Napa's relatively high canopy cover resulted in Plan permitting system that applies to the care of protected trees, recommendations that focus on maintaining and enhancing including street trees, significant trees, and native trees of a canopy where possible. Additional analyses were conducted to certain size and species on private properties over one acre. City see where changes in canopy change occurred through time; staff responds to tree related emergencies and ensures priority investigate tree canopy by different land use and ownership maintenance related to public safety occurs. designations; and, to quantify the ecosystem services provided by Napa's urban forest. Trees require proactive and routine maintenance to ensure a resilient, safe, and sustainable resource. This Plan serves as a guide for the City of Napa to build on their already strong urban forestry program and preservation practices throughout the city.
-
INTRODUCTION THE IMPORTANCE OF TREES
Trees have been shown to provide a number of benefits, including: Reduce energy use by shading and sheltering buildings, which can reduce both cooling costs during the summer and heating The trees and tree canopy that make up Napa's Improve air quality by filtering pollutants and absorbing gases costs during the winter (Akbari et al 1997; Ellison et al 2017). urban forest provide a variety of different physical, (Karl 2010). Napa's trees intercept particulate matter (PM,, and social, economic, and aesthetic benefits that PM,) such as dust, pollen, and smoke; absorb harmful gaseous Reduce urban heat island effects by shading surfaces and cooling continuously mitigate the effects of urbanization and pollutants like ozone (O,), nitrogen dioxide (NO,), and sulfur dioxide the air (Akbari et al 1997; McDonald et al 2016). Temperatures in development and protect and enhance lives within (SO,); and even emit beneficial oxygen. urban environments can be significantly greater than temperatures the community. Trees are the one of the only types of in surrounding regions, but trees provide shade for sidewalks, infrastructure a city can invest in that will become Improve water quality by intercepting stormwater (McPherson et asphalts, buildings, and other impervious surfaces which reduces more valuable over time, as the benefits provided by al 2002; Xiao et al 1998). Tree leaves and roots reduce runoff the amount of radiant energy absorbed and stored by hardscapes trees grow as they grow. Large, healthy mature trees volumes and rates, increase soil infiltration, lessen erosion effects, and thereby lowers ambient temperatures in those areas. with greater leaf surface area provide greater and filter harmful water pollutants. benefits to the community than smaller-statured or Support wildlife by providing critical habitat and connectivity. less healthy trees (Clarket al 1997), indicating the Reduce carbon dioxide (CO,) in the atmosphere by sequestering Increased canopy density and vegetative cover supports birds value of protecting, preserving, promoting, and carbon and storing it in woody biomass (Garvey et al 2022). and bats (Threlfall et al 2016); mammals, insects, fish, and planning for Napa's trees. Additionally, trees further reduce CO, emissions by lowering other aquatic species (Pena et al 2017); dispersal of other the demand for energy and the corresponding consumption flora (Fernandez-Juricic, 2001; Dwyer et al 1992); and even of electrical energy or natural gas. soil organisms (Kooch et al 2018).
CRAPE MYRTLE COAST LIVE OAK CHINESE PISTACHE
Lagerstroemia spp. Quercus agrifolia Pistacia chinensis Replacement Total Annual Replacement Total Annual Replacement Total Annual Value Benefits Value Benefits Value Benefits
$9,077,900 $10,108 $15,787,916 $24,309 $5,352,350 $8,132 Carbon Stored Annual Carbon 2007200) Annual Carbon arbon Stor Annual Carbon 573.35 tons Sequestered Sequestered 36.75 to Sequestered
43.38 tons/yr. 41.01 tons/yr. 28.6 tons/yr.
verage Trun Average Trunk verage Trui
liamete Air Pollution Diameter Air Pollution iamete Air Pollution
6.3" Removal 10.7" Removal 8.7" Removal
0.25 tons/yr. 1.58 tons/yr. 0.3 tons/yr.
Trees Planted Trees Planted Trees Planted
6,325 Avoided Runoff 3,640 Avoided Runoff 2,508 Avoided Runoff 218,647 gallons/yr.| 1,397,660 262,606
gallons/yr. gallons/yr.
Figure 1. Breakdown of benefits for the top species of trees in Napa. 3 -
Enhance aesthetics, beautify the landscape, and increase Improve physical and mental health outcomes across a wide Increase public safety by discouraging crime and strengthening property values (Theriault et al 2002; Wolf, 2007). The aesthetic range of conditions. Greater tree density and diversity has been community bonds (Gilstad-Hayden et al 2015; Kuo 2001; Troy et value provided by trees is part of Napa's unique charm and appeal shown to lower incidence rates of depressive symptoms (Sherer, al 2012). Tree canopy cover has been linked to reduced crime that benefits residents and visitors alike. 2003; Jennings et al 2015); reduce rates of obesity, type 2 diabetes, rates, even after adjusting for a number of other variables, such high blood pressure, and asthma (Ulmer et al 2016); speed up as median household income, level of education, and rented Reduce wind erosion which thereby protects soil, crops, and recovery times after surgery (Ulrich, 1984); increase immune function versus owner-occupied housing. biodiversity (Baudry et al 2000; Hodges and Brandle 1996). Trees and lower associated disease and mortality risks (Giacinto et al planted as windbreaks and hedgerows decrease wind speeds, 2021); reduce hospitalizations and deaths due to air pollution (Tiwary Increase academic performance in students attending schools which mitigates the erosion of fertile soil, loss of biodiversity, and et al 2009); and even reduce the incidence of prematurity and low with more tree cover (Li and Sullivan 2016; Li et al 2019; greenhouse gas emissions caused by agricultural development birth weights in infants as much as the mothers who quit smoking Matsuoka, 2010). High schools with a higher density of tree cover while improving high-value crop performance and market pricing during pregnancy (Jones and Goodkind 2019; Currie et al 2009). are positively associated with higher ACT scores, graduation for those crops. rates, and college preparedness.
Boost economic activity in retail areas. The shade and
Amplify the sense of community by increasing walkability and aesthetic benefits of trees in commercial areas such as Create food sources such as fruits, nuts, and flowers, which in social cohesion (American Planning Association 2003; Ulmer et al downtown have been shown to attract customers more turn provides opportunities for increased food security and food 2016). People who live near outdoor greenery such as trees tend frequently, invite them to linger and shop for longer, and even sovereignty for all Napa residents (Bunge et al 2019). to be more familiar with nearby neighbors, socialize with those increase their willingness to pay more for goods (Wolf, 2005). neighbors more frequently, and express greater feelings of Provide jobs in urban forest management and consulting community and safety than residents lacking nearby green spaces. Reduce noise from traffic, even more effectively than synthetic (Thompson et al 2021). barriers (Ow and Ghosh 2017).
RED MAPLE CALIFORNIA WHITE OAK TRIDENT MAPLE
Acer rubrum Quercus lobata Acer buergerianum
Replacement Total Annual Replacement Total Annual Replacement Total Annual Value Benefits Value Benefits Value Benefits
$3,654,289 $7,266 $7,577,577 $11,325 $2,079,999 $5,023
Carbon Stored Annual Carbon Carbon Stored Annual Carbon arbon Stor Annual Carbon 272.61 tons Sequestered 764.8 tons Sequestered 83.64 tor Sequestered
21.48 tons/yr. 24.16 tons/yr. 12.71 tons/yr.
Average Trun Average Trunk Darage trunk
Diamete Air Pollution Diameter Air Pollution Air Pollution Remova 11.2" Removal Removal
0.33 tons/yr. 0.66 tons/yr. 0.26 tons/yr.
Trees Planted Trees Planted Trees Planted
2,034 Avoided Runoff 1,696 Avoided Runoff Avoided Runoff 290,690 581,525 gallons/yr. 230,531 gallons/yr.
gallons/yr.
Figure 1. Breakdown of benefits for the top species of trees in Napa. 4 -
VISION FOR NAPA'S URBAN FOREST
PLAN PURPOSE
AND VISION City of Napa Urban Forestry Management Plan Vision Statement The City of Napa is committed to a long-term vision focused on maintaining and enhancing a healthy urban forest. The Urban Forestry Management Plan creates a framework that recognizes trees as an essential part of the community's infrastructure that supports public health, climate resilience, and provides a wide range of social, environmental, and economic benefits to the Napa community.
Napa's Plan was developed by staff
in the Parks and Urban Forestry
Division and Davey Resource Group,
Inc., with guidance and input from
Preserve Promote
collaborating City departments,
external stakeholders, and Trees are an integral part of the community and key to the Each community member can play a role in sustaining a healthy community members. The planning health and character of neighborhoods, parks, and streets urban forest. Public education and an increased community process started in January 2023 and across Napa. Preserving healthy trees and ensuring young trees awareness of the value of trees remain a primary focus. A concludes in March 2026. This Plan can grow to reach their full canopy potential will contribute to significant percentage of Napa's tree canopy is on private sets a 40-year vision for Napa's the overall health of the urban forest. Tree preservation will be property. To build further tree or canopy capacity on private urban forestry program and outlines supported by encouraging practices aiming to effectively sustain property, and position Napa to enhance its tree canopy, recommendations and actionable existing trees throughout their life cycle. increased community engagement, public education initiatives, steps as a pathway forward. and programs aimed to incentivize and encourage private planting will be integrated.
The Plan's purpose is to guide
the City of Napa's management
strategy and decision-making to
further develop the urban forest
programs and associated policies Protect Plan
that align with the City's
comprehensive planning initiatives. Tree protection programs and education are instrumental in Proactive planning for the maintenance and care of trees is Specifically, the plan analyzes urban establishing best practices that ensure the existing canopy cover essential to maintaining a healthy urban forest. Through the forestry data and outlines a set of is nurtured, enhanced, and protected for current residents and utilization of tree inventory management software, data related targeted recommendations as a future generations. to the urban forest can be properly managed through tracking roadmap for Napa officials, staff, and planning efforts. To maximize the benefit to the community, residents, and businesses to use prioritized planting efforts in areas with the lowest canopy levels moving forward. and highest heat exposure will ensure the benefits of trees are shared equitably across the community. Future expansion of tree care initiatives will require the identification and appropriation of dedicated resources.
5 HOW TO USE THIS PLAN
The development of the Plan is based on the principles of adaptive management, which seek to answer a series of questions about Napa's present and future (Figure 3). Adaptive management is commonly used for resource planning and provides a useful conceptual framework for managing an urban forest resource. The Parks and Recreation Services Department can use these questions and the urban forest management tools presented in this Plan to periodically assess the state of the urban forest and the effectiveness of the urban forestry program. Collaborating City departments and community partners can all use this plan to identify their role in realizing the goals set out for the future Napa urban forest.
ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT APPROACH
Section 1 Section 2
What do we have? What do we want?
Presents the current state of Napa's Summarizes community and trees to establish a baseline of stakeholder guidance.
where the city is today. It also
contains an assessment of the tools,
resources, plans, and programs
used to manage the urban forest.
Section 4 Section 3
How are we doing? How do we get there?
Summarizes ways that Napa can Provides goals, recommendations, monitor and measure progress and actions for Napa's urban forest in meeting the goals set forth in managers and partners to use in this Plan. moving towards the shared vision
for the urban forest.
Figure 3. Schematic: (1) what do we have, (2) what do we want, (3) how do we get there and (4) how are we doing. -
ABOUT NAPA TREE SUPPORT NAPA'S
SENSE OF PLACE
SECTION 1: Community History
Napa's Tree Benefits Overview
With an estimated 10,000-12,000 years of human habitation, Napa Valley WHAT DO has a rich history and holds significance to a number of different people Quantifiable benefits from the urban forest and cultures (Napa County Historical Society, 2025). Napa, California, are based on the environmental functions nestled in the heart of Napa Valley, was originally inhabited by the trees perform. Trees provide air quality WE HAVE?
Wappo group, which established permanent villages and sustained benefits, slow down stormwater and remove themselves through hunting and gathering. In the early 1800s, Mexican pollutants. Trees also sequester carbon in settlements and culture arrived in Napa Valley. The subsequent discovery woody stems and roots. The economic value of gold in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada the following year brought an of these ecosystem functions is calculated in influx of miners and entrepreneurs. Napa is an old City by California terms of both volume and cost savings. It is standards, founded in 1847 as a jumping off point for 49ers bound for important to note that current assessments the Gold Rush, then incorporated in 1872 (Napa General Plan, 2022). The account for only a small part of all of the agricultural industry grew, the railroad arrived, and the town steadily benefits trees provide. The benefits of Napa's grew throughout the following decades. Urban trees were planted as the trees were calculated in terms of both the land was converted into neighborhoods and parks and helped to create a urban forest, or total citywide canopy acres, sense of place. The City has demonstrated commitment to the and community tree population, or individual preservation, maintenance, and growth of its urban forest as a Tree City trees in the City's public tree inventory.
USA since 2001 and through plans, standards, and initiatives, such as the Tree Ordinance, originally adopted in 1999 and longstanding policies around public tree removals, replacements, planting, and preservation.
Today, Napa is a picturesque destination renowned for its world-class wineries, stunning landscapes, and vibrant cultural scene featuring art galleries, gourmet dining, and outdoor recreational opportunities.
Historically, jobs came largely in heavy industrial pursuits; however today's workforce is increasingly based on tourism. Napa enjoys low crime rates, high standards of living, clean air, and nearly perfect weather year-round. As the County seat for one of the world's Great Wine Capitals, the Napa name is synonymous with quality. Napa experiences a Mediterranean climate characterized by warm, dry summers and mild winters, creating ideal conditions for a diverse collection of native and exotic woody plants. The community was originally built in an oak savannah, and finds a balance between urban forestry, agriculture, and the preservation of these crucial woodlands.
7 Benefits from the Urban Forest PROPORTION OF BENEFITS PROVIDED BY COMMUNITY TREES These numbers reflect the benefits provided by all tree canopy within Napa on both public and private property and are based on calculations related to canopy acres.
Air Quality Improvement
The urban tree canopy assessment' described in Section 1 • Community Tree Population • Citywide Tree Canopy estimates that Napa's tree canopy annually provides $2.7 million in quantifiable benefits, including:
10%
• Removing 225,780 Ib. of air pollutants, including carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen dioxide (NO,), ozone (0,), sulfur dioxide 50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000
(SO,), and particulate matter (PM,,, PM, s), valued at $1.4 million • Reducing stormwater runoff by approximately 52.9 million Pollutants Removed (pounds) gallons annually, valued at $475,920
• Sequestering an additional 4,500 tons of carbon, valued Carbon Sequestration at $766,801 • Community Tree Population • Citywide Tree Canopy Annual Benefits from Community Trees
These numbers reflect the benefits provided by the trees in parks 8% and other City-managed public properties (in contrast to the benefits provided by the City's total urban forest as described in 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 5,000 the previous section). Carbon Sequestered (tons)
The community tree inventory resource analysis' described in Section 1 estimates that annually, community trees provide Stormwater Runoff Reduction quantifiable benefits to Napa totaling $184,176. The average • Community Tree Population • Citywide Tree Canopy
annual per tree benefit is $5.40. These benefits include:
• 11.0 tons of air pollution removed, improving air quality, and reducing adverse health incidents for a value of $100,707, an 4% average of $2.95 per tree.
• 378.3 tons of carbon directly sequestered, valued at 10,000,000 20,000,000 30,000,000 40,000,000 50,000,000 60,000,000 $64,521, an average of $1.89 per tree.
Runoff Reduced (gallons)
• 2.1 million gallons of avoided stormwater runoff, valued at $18,948, an average of $0.56 per tree. Figure 4. Napa's community tree population is providing approximately 10% of citywide air quality benefits, 8% of carbon sequestration benefits, and 4% of stormwater benefits, based on calculations from i-Tree Eco (V 6.1.36) and i-Tree Canopy (v7.1). '-Tree Canopy (V7.1) was used to estimate and quantify the ecosystem benefits from Napa's urban tree cancov to air quality, stermyater runoff. and carbon sequestration. The dollar value l of these henefits was calculated based on cost-modeline valuations from i-Tree Eco (v6.1.36)/ ‹ -Tree Fro vol 44) was lised to estimate the henetits of Nana's community treps. 8 NAPA'S TREES
What is an Urban Tree
Tree Canopy Assessment Summary Canopy Assessment?
In 2023, Napa completed a baseline urban tree canopy
An urban tree canopy assessment uses
assessment based on 2022 high-resolution aerial imagery, the most recent available at the time. Tree canopy covers aerial imagery to measure the total amount approximately 2,528 acres (21.5%) of Napa's total 11,760 acres and distribution of tree canopy on both (18.4 square miles). public and private property within a community as viewed from above. This
The report also examined data related to: information can be used to better understand the city's urban tree canopy-
Land Cover
where it is located, how it is changing over
Land area that is covered (or not) by trees and vegetation, as time, the benefits it provides to residents,
viewed from above. In addition to tree canopy, Napa's land cover where canopy should be preserved, and
includes 39.5% impervious surfaces such as roads, buildings, and parking lots; 28.6% grass and other low-lying, non-woody where potential future tree planting vegetation; 8.3% bare soil; and <1% open water. opportunities exist. Napa is encouraged to reference these results, utilize the data for
Change In Tree Canopy Cover From 2012-2022 additional analyses, and continue to seek This analysis used a point sampling method to determine how new tools and information to measure tree canopy cover has changed within social and political progress, report accomplishments, and
boundaries over time. Overall, Napa's tree canopy increased inform management decisions.
by 19.0% between 2012 to 2022, from 18.1% in 2012 to
Napa's Urban Tree Canopy
Total City Area: 11,760 acres (18.4 square miles)
Urban Tree Canopy (2022): 2,528 acres (21.5%) 39.5%| 8.3% Urban Tree Canopy (2012): 2,124 acres (18.1%) Impervious Surfaces Bare Soil Canopy Change (2012-2022): 403.9 acres (+19.0%)| 4,649.8 acres 975.4 acres O Napa City Limits
28.6% <1%
In Napa, more than 76.0% of the canopy consists of trees in Land Cover Classification Map 1. Land cover classification in Grass/Low-lying Open Water
fair or better condition. Vegetation 242.0 acres • Tree Canopy Napa based on 2022 aerial imagery. 3,364.4 acres
Impervious Surfaces Tree canopy is concentrated along
Grass/Low-Lying Vegetation the Western and Eastern borders of
21.5%
) Bare Soil town at the Wildland Urban
Tree Canopy
2,528.4 acres • Open Water Interface, and along the Napa River. 9 Tree Canopy Cover And Change Within U.S. Census Block Groups Geographic Boundaries Block group data can be used to investigate trends in social and economic factors.
Land area that is shaded by trees, summarized by social and • Napa has 69 block groups ranging from 4.7% cover to 94.0% political boundaries including:
canopy cover.
• Canopy cover across block groups was compared with
Public/Private Land
demographic variables including population, income, median Public land is needed for key infrastructure and private land can home value, race, age, education, and poverty, and linear help augment tree canopy in public areas with limited space for correlations with minority populations and tree canopy
tree planting. Additionally, in some areas, space may be so cover were identified (Figure 5).
limited in the public rights-of-way that the only opportunity for • From 2012-2022, canopy change in Napa's block groups
tree planting will be on private land. ranged from a loss of -12.6 acres to a gain of 29.3 acres. • A total of 76.4% of land in Napa is privately owned (8,100 acres), highlighting the importance of trees
on private property to the overall urban forest.
• The average canopy cover is greater on privately owned land (23.9%) compared to publicly owned land (16.3%).
• From 2012-2022, private property added 309.9 acres of tree canopy, or 76.7% of the citywide 403.9-acre increase.
R2 = 0.1436
100
80 20
0.00 10.00 20.00 30.00 40.00 50.00 60.00 70.00 80.00 90.00 % Canopy
igure 5. Tree canopy cover by Census Block Groups correlated with minority population he scatter plot's trendline is indicated with the dashed lin 10 60500650200
500006512006009
603006502906013
600006502:07060
680200703 502006502002012)
606006502006022
305006502007062
C0200880200C
2008502007000 605018802006008-605008502068000
6020065021
SEEIN 5006E 20030
6066385620050
CoSC06502007681
606005542007050
606005502043093 0060650/00/80
G0600S802003309 C0C005S62002000
COSCOEEUZUUROCZ c060068220(2022)
605502008020
20c00d50200200L
40600682003021 606038601002061
C0.0068: 2102009
• Napa City Limits
Canopy Coverage Percent
0% to 15%
15% to 35%
• 35% to 45%
• Greater than 45%
Map 2. Urban tree canopy cover in Napa by US Census Block Groups. Tree canopy is greatest along the Western and Eastern edges of the City and lowest in the Southern portion of the City (which is primarily agriculture).
6005502006013
502007063 0030350803012
806005502000021
5005502007062
60600550200707A 306005502
8005302007073 G086005502008015
03502007045
02001018.
G06005502007032
G06005502013031
802011021 G06003S
306005502003043
8005502001045 040003502002021
005502008041 9600550200208
606005502003003
00035020203) C0600330200301 00005SgR0Ne9N
502002019 G06005502003012 03802003028
40604550200900 • Napa City Limits
Canopy Change Percent
• Greater than 10% Loss
• 10% to 0% Loss
• 0% to 10% Gain
• 10% to 20% Gain
• Greater than 20% Gain
Map 3. Historic tree canopy change (2012-2022) in Napa by US 123
Census Block Groups. The greatest increases in canopy have occurred in the Central and Southern portions of town, where tree canopy cover is lower. The Western and Eastern border areas have experienced small losses in canopy but still have the highest levels of canopy cover in the City.
12 Historic Districts
Napa contains nine Historic Districts, which encompass a total of 548.4 acres and range from 18.1% to 33.8% canopy cover. Zone Percent Canopy Napa River Watershed • Historic Districts contain a total of 157.4 acres of tree canopy or an average of 28.7% canopy cover, which Residential- 31% The Napa River watershed provides habitat Single Family
exceeds the citywide average of 21.5%. to many aquatic species, including some Park or endangered species of fish. Tree canopy
Open Space 28.7%
Zoning along drainages reduces the flow and
Zoning reflects the communitys plan for growth in specific areas. esidential
25.4% volume of stormwater, which prevents
lulti Famil
Zoned areas encompass 9,714 acres of Napa.
erosion and the movement of pollutants
• Residential areas have the highest canopy cover and
Residential Office 25% into water bodies, both of which can contain the majority of Napa's urban tree canopy.
threaten aquatic life. Expanding canopy
Medical Office 22.5% cover in these watershed areas can also Parks
Napa has 54 parks as well as facilities and civic spaces that promote canopy connectivity/ wildlife have an average canopy cover of 25.3%. Many of Napa's parks 21.2% corridors, erosion control, stormwater and have space to accommodate additional tree planting. In recent flood mitigation, and increase the amount of years, there has been a focus on Napa County Resource 19.9% ecosystem benefits the community receives.
Conservation District's acorns to oaks program at Alson Park.
However, Napa's parks vary in size, form, and use, and the Commercial Use 13.4% availability of space to plant trees is limited by the different land uses in parks. For example, Oxbow Commons Flood Bypass, an ublic c uasi Publ 12%
Army Corps of Engineers project, currently has 3% canopy cover, Tree Canopy Connectivity but current management goals for this park to prioritize Downtown Public 11.5% The overall health of Napa's urban ecosystem depends highly on stormwater management and flooding do not allow for the ability of the trees, plants, wildlife, insects, and humans to additional canopy cover. Agricultural
Resource 9.2% interact collectively as a whole. Unfortunately, urban growth and sprawl often reduce tree canopy and disrupt canopy
Water Drainages and River Buffer
Industrial Use 9.1% connectivity, which degrades ecosystem health and habitat Napa has 5 named watershed areas and 26 water drainage quality. This decline results in disturbance of existing ecosystems areas that cover 11,760 acres (the full city boundary). Canopy Mixed Use 6.8% and increases the risk and susceptibility to invasive species. On cover in Napa's drainage areas ranges from 1.6% to 28.8%.| the other hand, the health and diversity of the overall canopy will • Along with drainages, this assessment analyzed land cover
2.2% often vastly improve by creating linkages between multiple within a 50-foot buffer along rivers and streams. The river Master Plan patches of canopy.
buffer covered 501.2 acres and had an average canopy
cover of 30.5%, greater than the citywide average of 21.5%.
Figure 6. Tree canopy cover in Napa by zoning type. Napa's existing canopy cover was analyzed to discover patterns in the distribution of canopy. The analysis found that Napa's urban forest includes the following:
13 -
• 36.2 acres of Core Canopy (1.43%): Tree canopy that exists within and relatively far from the riparian forest or savannah/ non-forest or savannah boundary (i.e., forested areas
Climate Resilience Planning
surrounded by more forested areas.
• 129.9 acres of Perforated Canopy (5.1%): Tree canopy that The City of Napa is implementing defines the boundary between core forests and relatively small a range of legislative and policy clearings (perforations) within the forest landscape. measures to combat climate • 2,006 acres of Patch Canopy (79.4%): Tree canopy of a small- change through the Napa forested area that is surrounded by non-forested land cover.
Sustainability Plan (2012), aligning
• 355.9 acres of Edge Canopy (14.1%): Tree canopy that defines its actions with Napa County's
the boundary between core forests and large core forests and large non-forested land cover features. When large enough, initiative to create a Regional edge canopy may appear to be unassociated with core forests. Climate Action and Adaptation Plan. Key initiatives include:
Climate Vulnerability and Heat Island
• Renewable energy sources,
Capturing land surface temperature is essential to monitoring through solar panel installations heat islands, air quality, and overall well-being for residents in and enhancing energy efficiency Napa. To establish an understanding of how urban forest canopy in buildings. affects heat islands, a land surface temperature analysis was • Sustainable transportation, with conducted using Landsat 8 imagery taken during the late efforts to expand public transit, afternoon during summer conditions. Most of the land within increase the use of electric buses, Napa city limits has moderate land surface temperatures, with a and develop bike lanes and mean of 78.3°F. pedestrian pathways.
• Waste reduction, through
Unshaded sidewalks, streets, and parking lots are among the zero waste initiatives and plastic greatest contributors to the creation of urban heat islands. Trees reduction ordinances, alongside and their canopy distribution can greatly affect the surface water conservation measures temperatures of an area. Trees, especially large mature trees, such as incentivizing water- can provide relief to these areas and should be considered efficient fixtures and improving where possible. There is a 24°F difference when comparing stormwater management. areas with high canopy cover to areas with very low canopy cover. The lowest recorded temperature was in a heavily • Napa City Limits Map 4. Napa's land surface temperatures are generally
forested area at 64.3 degrees, while the highest temperature moderate with a mean of 78.3 F, but there is a 24°F Average Land recorded was 88.8 degrees located in northwestern Napa. difference between areas with high canopy cover (64.3 Surface Temperature degrees) and areas with very low canopy cover (88.8 High: 88.83 F degrees). The Northern and Western parts of Napa would
When considering heat islands, the northern parts of Napa benefit the most from new tree plantings to help mitigate would benefit the most from increased canopy cover. the urban heat island effect. Low: 64.26 F 14 Wildfire Risk
Wildfires are an annual occurrence in many parts of the United States, causing major damage and affecting both the G06005502008C physical and social landscapes of the communities that are G08005502008071 impacted. Napa's wildfire risk study considered social and G06005502006033 G0600550200/061 G06005502006024
physical factors to identify areas that may be at greater risk 005502007/639 606005502006013
of being impacted by wildfires. Physical factors, including G06003502007063 G06005502006009 1039
higher temperatures, slope, distance to vegetation, building G0600550200707 003502002072 006003502005033 10201203,
proximity to other structures and to wildlands, tree health, and canopy density were selected to identify areas where 060055020070401 606005502005045 B030U5S3P00800
06005502005042
there is a greater likelihood of higher impacts from wildfires. 60600550200505
G06005502007031)
104005003 C06005602008031
Based on analysis of physical factors, block groups on the C0600850200600 east and west borders of Napa are most at risk, since G06005502011031 canopy cover on the east and west edges is much greater 005502008033 306005602004003 G0600350200300
than in the more developed city center. Factors like
G06003502008042
vegetation, canopy, and proximity to the wildland urban 206008802003039 (G06005502002012
interface put these areas at greater risk of wildfire damage. 006008802002008 05502008033.
Block groups in South Napa have a lower risk. Additional analysis of wildfire risk is evaluated in the City's 2025 991000502003028 Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP).
• Napa City Limits
Physical Wildfire Rank
Low
• Medium
• High
Map 5. Wildfire risk in Napa by Census Block Groups based on physical risk factors. Block groups on the Eastern and Western borders of Napa where canopy is most dense face the greatest risk, while block groups in Southern Napa have a lower risk. 15 -
Tree Canopy and Equity
To identify and prioritize planting potential for social equity. census data including median income, ages 65 and over, ages under 18, racial minority percent, poverty percent, population density, renter percent, and single-family home percent were 3000039020000 analyzed and classified into five rankings from low to high.
Higher priorities for social equity focus efforts on providing 02000025 trees and tree canopy to all citizens who are particularly 2005043 E0800550200103)
G0600550209E061 vulnerable to environmental factors that can be affected by 05502005043 tree canopy. These priority sites are deemed to have the 502005042
greatest return due to their importance in providing residents 600005302007081 G08005502005053
38005502005031 of the community with increased access to nature. Areas with 8000035020970 C08003802001009 very high priority for planting are areas where both the tree 2008031
C04003802003093 canopy cover is low, and the composite of social equity census 002011 C08063502601009 data are also low.
106307002021G08005802003031
8005502002022 COBOOSS:
Another resource that was used to assess equity was American G08005502002023-
Forests' Tree Equity Score (2025). This industry-standard, 6005502002032
5502002031 C06003903003091 map-based tool pairs tree canopy data with socioeconomic G06005502003013
G06005502003012 Census Block Group data and utilizes information about a city's 002013
tree canopy, building density, and land surface temperature, as well as their population's income and employment, human health, languages spoken, race and age demographics, to 308005302009001 calculate a score from 1-100 and automatically generate recommendations to help the community achieve a more
equitable distribution of tree canopy by bringing more block → High groups up to a higher score through strategic tree planting.
Social Vulnerability Index
Napa has a composite Tree Equity Score of 80, and its block 306005502010057
groups' individual scores range from 44 in 201200-1, Napa's High Low northernmost block group, to 100 in several areas. Currently, Canopy Percent 49 of 64 block groups in Napa (76.6%) have a Tree Equity Score 23 below 100. In order to bring every block group and therefore Map 6. Bivariate model based on social vulnerability and the citywide composite score to a score of 100, Napa would existing tree canopy cover. Census block groups with low need to plant 1.1 square miles (~704 acres) of canopy or existing tree canopy (blue) and high social vulnerability Index rankings (red), illustrated on the map in deep purple, approximately 50,676 trees in strategic locations. are the highest priority for new tree plantings.
16 TREE INVENTORY AND RESOURCE
ANALYSIS SUMMARY
TREE EQUITY SCORE
LOCATION INSIGHTS
Community trees are publicly managed trees along streets, parks, and at City facilities and were inventoried to better understand the resource and management needs. Additional Distribution of Scores
trees that were not inventoried but that are part of the Composite score: 80
City's urban forestry network are located in the City's natural area and open space parks. All of these trees play an important role in Napa, providing numerous tangible and intangible benefits to residents, visitors, neighboring communities, and the surrounding Napa Valley. People in the community value this resource and recognize them as integral to the livability and comfortability of the community.
Resource Structure
The following information characterizes Napa's overall
0-69 70-79 80-89 90-99 100 community tree resource:
• Napa's community tree inventory includes 34, 136 trees, 2,676 Summary
vacant sites, and 382 stumps, which means that 91.7% of community tree planting sites are full, and Napa has an 82,844 22% opportunity to fill 3,058 additional vacant planting sites.
Urban area population Children (0-17) • The top three most prevalent species are: Lagerstroemia spp. 27% 18% (Crape myrtle species, 18.5%), Quercus agrifolia (coast live Tree canopy cover Seniors (65+) oak, 10.7%), and Pistacia chinensis (Chinese pistache, 7.4%). • 52.3% of trees are less than 8 inches in diameter (DBH) and 22% 6%
People in poverty Linguistic isolation 6.3% of trees are larger than 24 inches in diameter, indicating an established age distribution.
46% 30% • Community trees provide approximately 1,536 acres of canopy People of color erage hea
irden ind cover which accounts for 13.2% of Napa's total land area. 5% • Replacement of all 34,136 community trees with trees of Unemployment 77%
equivalent size, species, and condition, would cost over Neighborhoods below 100
$116 million.
• Community trees have stored more than 13,209 tons of
Figure 7. Tree Equity Score Location Insights for Napa, CA.
Source: American Forests. carbon (CO,) in woody and foliar biomass to date. 17 -
Species Diversity
Lagerstroemia spp. 18.5%
Maintaining diversity in a community tree resource is important.
Dominance of any single species or genus can have detrimental Quercus agrifolio 10.7% consequences in the event of storms, drought, disease, pests, or Pistacia chinensis 7.3%
other stressors that can severely affect a community tree resource and the flow of benefits and costs over time. In light of Acer rubrum 6.0%
significant pests and diseases, many cities are opting to increase tree species diversity to improve resilience. Quercus lobato 5.0% Napa's community tree resource contains 260 unique species with: Acer buergerianum 4.7% • 24% native to California and 41% native to North America. Pyrus calleryana 4.2% • Four species considered invasive according to California Platanus x hybrida 3.4%
Invasive Species Advisory Committee, including Ailanthus altissima (tree of heaven), Eucalyptus globulus (blue gum Magnolia grandiflora 3.2% eucalyptus), Triadica sebifera (Chinese tallow) and Schinus molle (California peppertree). Sequoia sempervirens 3.1%
• 24,370 (71.4%) susceptible to pests and pathogens and the Ginkgo biloba 1.6%
potential risk is estimated at $93.2 million.
• The three most predominant species represent 36,5% of the Liquidambar styraciflua 1.6%
population: Lagerstroemia spp. (Crape myrtle species,
18.5%), Quercus agrifolia (coast live oak, 10.7%), and Umbellularia californica 1.5% Pistacia chinensis (Chinese pistache, 7.4%).
Fraxinus angustifolia 1.4%
Ligustrum lucidum 1.3%
Celtis sinensis 1.1%
Acacia melanoxylon 1.1%
Fraxinus velutina 1.1%
Cercis canadensis 1.1%
all other species 22.1%
Figure 8. Most prevalent species in Napa's community tree inventory (>1% of Population). 18 -
The widely used 10-20-30 rule of thumb states that an urban large shade trees typically provide more shade, pollutant • Less than 1% of trees in the 18-24 inch and >24 inch diameter tree population should consist of no more than 10% of any one uptake, carbon sequestration, and rainfall interception than classes are small-stature species. species, 20% of any one genus, and 30% of any one family (Clark small trees. et al 1997). Using the 10-20-30 rule as a minimum goal, Napa's • Of the 35% of trees between 8 and 18 inches in diameter, Analysis of the age distribution of Napa's most prevalent species, community tree resource has an overabundance of Quercus 29,1% are large-stature species and 6.1% are small- described in detail in the resource analysis, can help resource agrifolia (coast live oak) on a species level and Lagerstromia spp. stature species. managers to understand and foresee maintenance activities and (Crape myrtle species) on a genera level. • Trees in the maturing and mature diameter classes (between future budgetary needs. In addition to informing managers of 18 and 24 inches and >24 inches, respectively) collectively the economics of prevalent species, managers can use the age Relative Age Distribution epresent 6.3% of the overall inventory. In general, these tree distribution to determine trends in plantings and adopt ill require more regular inspections and routine maintenanc strategies for species selection in the years to come The relative age of a tree can be approximated from the trunk as they mature.
diameter (DBH). Individual tree DBHs were compiled to
understand the distribution of the entire tree resource (Figure 9).
A desirable distribution has a high proportion of young trees to offset establishment and age-related mortality as the percentage of older trees declines over time (Richards, 1982/83; Morgenroth NAPA COMMUNITY TREE INVENTORY AGE STRUCTURE et al 2020). This ideal, albeit uneven, distribution suggests a large fraction of trees (~40%) should be young, with a DBH less than eight inches, while only 10% should be in the large diameter classes (>24 inches DBH). Planting enough trees to plan for the • Large-Stature Trees • Small-Stature Trees • Ideal Distribution succession of trees that are mature and reaching the end of their 20,000
lifetime is important for maintaining canopy continuity. 18,000
52.2%
Napa's community tree resource age distribution has: 16,000 14,000 40%
• Trees in the young age class (8 inches or less in diameter) 12,000 Number of Trees 35.2%
which represent 52.3% of the overall inventory. 10,000 30% • Within this size class, trees less than four inches in diameter 8,000 represent 21.8% of the overall population, indicating a recent • 20% 6,000
increase in new tree planting. 4,000
• 10%
• Of the 52.3% of trees under 8" in diameter, 29.6% are large- 2,000
stature species that will likely grow into the largest size class 6.2% 6.3% eventually, and 22.6% are small-stature species such as Young Established Maturing Mature
Lagerstroemia spp., Napa's most prevalent species, that may remain in one of the smaller size classes even at maturity. Figure 9. Napa's community tree population contains slightly more than half of all trees in the young (<8" DBH) size class, induding a relatively even split between small- and large-stature species; 35% of trees in the established (8-18" DBH) size class, of which most are large-stature species; and 6% of • Trees in the established age class (between 8 and 18 inches in trees in each of the maturing (18-24" DBH) and mature (>24" DBH) size classes, of which nearly all are large-stature species. diameter) represent more than 35% of the overall inventory.
This age group is a positive indicator of future benefits since 19 MAINTENANCE NEEDS
Sidewalks and Other Hardscapes in Napa NAPA PLANTING SPACES During the inventory process, maintenance needs were Pavement maintenance is one of the most costly activities recorded for all inventoried community trees. The majority of to perform. The United States spent $27.5 billion in 2019 on trees were assigned pruning. pavement repairs, up 13.8% from the previous year 25,000 (Reason Foundation, 2021). In Napa, for the fiscal year Recommended Maintenance Number of Trees 22/23, the City budgeted approximately $2.5 million for 20,000
sidewalk repairs. For fiscal year 19/20, Napa had completed Small Tree Routine Prune 13,939 276 repairs to sidewalks (City of Napa Public Works Operations, 2020). 15,000
Large Tree Routine Prune 13,349
ber of
Training Prune 3,973 Shade from trees can lessen the amount of UV radiation 10,000 from the sun that hits the pavement. Therefore, shade
Priority Pruning 2,156
protects the pavement resulting in less frequent and costly Removal 719 repairs. Strategically planting large broadleaf trees can 5,000 reduce the amount of sun damage. In fact, a 2005 study by Total 34,136
McPherson and Muchnick looked at the cost benefit of
shade mitigation strategies and found that large <4 ft 4-8 ft >8 ft Table 1. Summary of recommended maintenance for community trees. hackberries were projected to save $7.13/ square meter Minimum Dimension ($0.66/square foot) over the 30-year period compared to Figure 10. The size of available community tree planter spaces in Napa.
Tree roots grow under sidewalks and other concrete infrastructure the unshaded street.
(such as curbs and gutters) to find moisture. When this occurs, it can result in cracked or lifted pavement. The majorily of community The tree inventory documented the narrowest dimension of tree sites are not adjacent to damaged hardscape, the most each community tree's growth space, in feet. Napa has 3,393 The most influential example of this in recent years was the common type of hardscape with damage is sidewalks (10.3%). tree planters that are less than 4ft, 21,007 planters 4-8ft, and Waverly Street sidewalk repairs through the City's 12,828 planters that are greater than 8ft (Figure 10). New tree residential sidewalk program. To address the number of Hardscape Damage Number of Sites Percent of Sites plantings match the tree's mature stature with the planter size. emergency calls from mature Raywood ash and trip/fall hazards from buckling sidewalks, the City prioritized repairs None 30,665 82.42 which had been delayed for many years. As infrastructure When trees are planted in adequate planter spaces, many Sidewalk 3,830 10.30 infrastructure conflicts do not arise. In Napa's past, many repairs and prompt replacement plantings transformed the large-statured street trees were planted in narrow planter street, pop-up events and community meetings hosted by Curb and Gutter 817 2.20 strips. Today, the City of Napa is repairing widespread damage the City aided in gathering increased community support.
Both 1,892 5.09 to sidewalks, curbs, and gutters. The City approaches mitigation By the end of the process, several residents opted to on a case-by-case basis to help address the needs in different preserve the street trees in front of their property while the Total 37,194 100% circumstances in a way that meets the community's needs. majority chose tree removal and replacement.
Table 2. Summary of damaged hardscape adjacent to community tree planter sites. 20 City of Napa Departments City of Napa Boards and Commissions Parks and Recreation Services Public Works Department Parks, Recreation and Trees Advisory Commission
Oversees the management of 55 parks spanning 800 acres, Maintains the City's streets, sidewalks, and drainage system, including landscaping and facilities management as well as as well as their vehicle and equipment fleet recreational programming • 8-member board of Napa residents and voters, enacted by Napa's Municipal Code (2.72)
• Advises the City Council and Parks and Recreation Director on various issues related to Parks and Recreation planning, including Parks and Recreation Sidewalks Engineering tree preservation, arboriculture, and the city's Tree Ordinance Urban Forestry and Facilities Program Division
• Acts as the decision-making body for actions set forth in the • Plants and maintains Acts as a liaison between Parks Assigns tree work when tree Supports reforesting when Municipal Code, such as plantings and removals (12.44) and trees on public and Urban Forestry staff and and infrastructure conflicts trees need to be removed significant and protected trees (12.45) properties such as parks, the general public by accepting arise through planned work during Capital landscaped medians, and processing requests, and the Sidewalk Improvement Projects and trees in certain complaints, permits and fees Improvement Program downtown areas
• Oversees the City's Tree
Protection and Street
Tree Replacement NAPA'S URBAN FOREST
5-year 206 ~12,000
MANAGEMENT
Trees removed Visual inspections
• Works with Public average:
Works, homeowners, 830 10
annual
contractors, and
number of Trees pruned Tree risk assessments The responsibilities for the planting, care, and maintenance of volunteers to carry out
tree-related activities maintenance trees in Napa are shared by the City Parks and Recreation 182 364
throughout town activities Services Department, the Public Works Department, and Trees planted Trees provided establishment care
external partners including contractors and residents of the community such as property owners and volunteers.
External Partners and City of Napa Residents
Private Property Owners Private Tree Care Companies Volunteer and Community Groups • Hold the maintenance responsibility for all street trees besides • Perform tree pruning and removals on public properties Frequently involved with tree planting at city parks and certain downtown trees, including tree planting, pruning, and through contracted work on other public properties, often funded by grants and removal if necessary in partnership with Parks and Urban Forestry staff or • Hired by homeowners to perform work on ROW trees and trees neighborhood organizations
• When property owners do not adequately perform this duty, on private property the City will get involved
Of the ~34,000 inventoried community trees, Napa's Parks and Tree work tasks are typically scheduled based on Urban Forestry Division is responsible for the full range of tree requests from the public, which currently exceed the Staff and Contractors
care activities for approximately 12,500 trees located in the City's City's staffing capacity to perform them. Consequently, The Parks and Recreation Services Department is subdivided into parks and other public properties, such as landscaped median tree maintenance tends to be reactive and prioritize two complementary divisions: easements, as well as certain trees in the City's downtown region hazard trees (especially following storm events) and (note: this does not include natural area / open space trees). trees that are causing infrastructure conflicts. Trees • Parks and Urban Forestry, which oversees the planning and These tasks include planting, watering, pruning, removals, and risk on city property within open space areas are also the on-the-ground management of Napa's 55 parks spanning 955 assessments. For the remaining 21,500 street trees located within responsibility of the Division, for safety and clearance acres (City of Napa General Plan). Parks and Urban Forestry the right-of-way (ROW), the Division oversees the Street Tree maintenance. When contractors perform tree work performs the majority of the City's tree activities. Replacement Program. Although adjacent property owners are for the city, Parks and Urban Forestry also oversees • Recreation and Public Art, which oversees the City's two responsible for routine maintenance for street trees, the Urban their management and performs quality control. community centers and provides recreational programming such Forestry Division has the authority to perform tree maintenance, Parks and Urban Forestry estimates that as sports leagues, camps, and events for youth, adults, seniors, such as pruning, removal, and replacement. The maintenance of approximately 40% of their time is dedicated to adults with special needs, and more. The Recreation and Public street trees is the responsibility of the adjacent property owner responding to emergencies and/or customer Art Division acts as the central office for the City's forestry and the Division works closely with adjacent property owners to requests, 40% to the sidewalk replacement program, operations, including accepting requests and complaints from promote street tree care through their permitting system and 10% to scheduled park tree maintenance, and 10% to the general public, handling permits, and collecting fees. code enforcement. If removals are necessary, a fee is assessed replanting trees. and replanting is required. Many residents are either unaware of this responsibility or unwilling or unable to perform it, which can lead to enforcement and maintenance challenges.
22 -
BUDGET AND FUNDING NAPA'S CITY BUDGET
Over the last five years, Napa has allocated an average of $1,328,820 to urban forestry activities such as tree pruning, Napa City Budget (5-year Avgs.) 5-year Avg. Tree-specific% FY 24-25 FY 23-24 FY 22-23 FY 21-22 FY 20-21 removals, planting, and other urban forestry tasks (Table 3). This funding for Napa's urban forestry program is provided through Total Expenditures $345,108,250 0.4% $309,589,000 $323,258,000 $500,247,000 $247,339,000 - several different avenues, including the city's General Fund, General Fund $125,340,250 1.1% $128,088,000 $123,569,000 $139,600,000 $110,104,000 Measure G, a general voter approved sales tax, and Measure U Total Parks and Recreation Services (P&R) $9,859,255 13.5% $10,394,810 $10,833,490 $13,037,359 $8,515,870 $6,514,745 (formerly T), a special tax approved by Napa voters. Additional contributions are made on a project-by-project basis through the Parks and Urban Forestry Division of P&R $6.066,271 21.9% $6,276,180 $6.597,250 57,667,342 $5,447,384 $4,343,201 Capital Improvement Program, and the city's Sidewalk
Tree-specific portion of P&UF of P&R* $1,328,820 - -
Replacement Program. Funding sources such as state and
federal grant programs, like those administered through CAL FIRE, periodically supplement the program.
year average provided by the City Foreste
General Fund
Napa is already implementing the most important guideline for communities determining how to fund their urban forestry Measure T program, which is to ensure that their primary source of funding is consistently included as an item in the city budget. The majority "Measure T" refers to a half-cent sales tax increase approved by The Urban Forestry Program Budget of Napa's urban forestry funding comes from the city's General Napa County voters in the General Election of 2012 under the Fund, which has averaged over $125 million, or approximately Napa Countywide Road Maintenance Act. Implemented by the The -$1.3 million 5-year average budget (2020- 36% of the city's $345 million in total expenditures, over the last 5 Napa Valley Transportation Authority's Taxing Authority, it is 2025) accounts for:
years (Table 3). Of the General Fund, the Parks and Recreational intended to supplement countywide efforts to improve Services Department receives an average of $9.9 million, transportation infrastructure by maintaining local streets. approximately 7% of the General Fund, and slightly over $6 million Measure T was implemented beginning in Fiscal Year 2018 and is 0.4% 1% of that goes towards the Parks and Urban Forestry Division $1.3 estimated to provide a total of $500 million over the next 25 of total expenditures of General Fund
million is specifically dedicated to urban forestry work (FY 2020- years, including an additional $8 million per year for the City of 2021 through FY 2024-2025 budgets). Napa to help maintain their 218 miles of existing roads, through paving and sidewalk repair programs.
13.2% 21.4%
of Parks and of Parks and
Recreational Urban Forestry
Services funding Division funding
23 Sidewalk Cost Share Program Urban Forestry Funding Benchmarking Napa's Sidewalk Cost Share Program, funded through a portion Napa's urban forestry program was benchmarked against of the State Gas Tax, is a program administered by the City of national and regional communities using the report "Municipal Napa's Public Works Department to provide financial assistance Tree Care and Management in the United States: A 2014 Urban to property owners through partial reimbursements for the and Community Forestry Census of Tree Activities" (Hauer et al repair of offset sidewalks and the removal or root shaving of 2016), with monetary values adjusted for inflation to reflect trees causing damage to sidewalks. The program is administered values in the summer of 2025. The 2014 Municipal Tree Care annually on a first-come, first-served basis until funds are Census is a robust data set that compiles urban forestry funding exhausted for that year. Homeowners can apply to take part in data from 667 communities throughout the United States and this program, prompting a Program Administrator to determine organizes them by geographic region and population size. The whether their sidewalk requires repair or replacement. If Western Region and the 50,000-99,000 Population Group, as well approved, work may be performed by an approved contractor or as the U.S. nationwide average, were used to benchmark Napa the homeowner, and the City will provide reimbursements up to (population ~77,000) to better understand their program needs. a specified level for various sidewalk construction and/or tree When evaluated by the number of public trees, Napa's $38.93 removal tasks. All work requires a permit and must be per-tree expenditure is less than the national, regional, and performed in accordance with Napa Municipal Code Chapter 50-99k population group averages by a factor of 1.2-1.3x.
12.44. Prior to any tree pruning or removal, the City's Parks and Trees Division will inspect the site and determine what is necessary. In the event that any trees are removed, they are required to be replaced with a new tree from the City's Approved Tree List.
Tree Task City of Napa
Total Budget $/tree $/capita
Tree Pruning $662,410 $19.41 $8.28
Tree Removal $264,964 $7.76 $3.31
Tree Planting $198,723 $5.82 $2.48
Other $202,723 $5.94 $2.53
Total $1,328,820 $38.93 $16.60
Table 4. City of Napa urban forestry budget allocation (City of Napa Fiscal Year 2022-2023 Urban Forestry budget). 24 Exploring Alternative Sources of Funding to Including tree protection and codifying current policies around "The Players" category rates 8 indicators related to the Support Napa's Urban Forest tree removal, planting, and preservation will help support tree interaction and cooperation of people and groups influencing canopy. Updating practices around tree protection during Napa's urban forest such as stakeholders, community members, At the time of the last Municipal Tree Census, at least 30% of and various City departments. Some of these indicators refer to construction may necessitate additional resources, but staff are communities were using some form of grant funding to support members of the general public, neighborhood groups, potential currently in place and addressing current policies around their urban forestry programs (Hauer and Peterson 2018), and that removal, planting, and preservation. funders, and other members of the green industry. Within "The number has likely increased since then. While they should not be Players" category, Napa rated 31% of indicators as low, 69% as considered a primary source of funding, and should never replace a Napa's Municipal Code chapter 12.45 Trees on Private Property moderate, and none as high.
local, consistent funding source, grants offered by the federal and/ outlines protections for privately owned and maintained or state government can be a great way for communities to significant trees and protected native trees. This Chapter should "The Management Approach" category rates 13 indicators that supplement their program and accomplish major projects that describe the City's management of its urban forest resource, be re-evaluated with the community to determine what the might be outside the capacity of their regular operating budget. community wants, considering the current categories of trees including whether or not the City has various assessments, plans receiving protections and the desired strength of protections. or policies in place such as an inventory, canopy assessment, MANAGEMENT TOOLS Align the community vision with the regulations and associated management plan (such as this one), tree protection policy, etc., program needs. as well as its levels of maintenance, staffing, and funding. Within "The Management Approach" category, Napa rated 4% of
Tree Ordinance
Indicators of a Sustainable Urban Forest indicators as low, 58% as moderate, and 38% as high.
Napa's Municipal Code chapter 12.44 Public Trees and Plants Napa's urban forestry program was evaluated using a set of outlines the regulatory framework for the protection, In total, the three categories collectively contain 30 indicators. industry-defined sustainability indicators to assess current preservation, planting (following the Master Street Tree List), and Napa rated 15% of these as low, 62% as moderate, and 23% as conditions in the urban forest resource, programming, and care of public trees and 12.45 Trees on Private Property outlines high. Refer to the following table and figure for a summary of engagement (as defined by Clark et al 1997 and Kenney et al some protections for protected native trees and significant trees Napa's assessed levels in the three categories. The detailed 2011). The sustainability indicators can be used to understand on private trees. These chapters were reviewed using a set of results for each category are also included in Appendix D. what areas of the program can be improved to meet industry criteria from the 2014 Municipal Tree Census and International recommendations.
Society of Arboriculture Ordinance Guidelines. The full ordinance review table is included in Appendix C and identifies several This tool identifies 30 urban forest indicators, organized into criteria that could be strengthened or are not currently three broad categories: The Trees, The Players, and The addressed, including: Management Approach. A summary is provided here, but see Appendix D " Sustainability Tables" for the full tables. • Tree protection during construction
• Requirements for tree planting and
"The Trees" category rates 9 indicators related to Napa's physical trees and urban forest resource, including the total • There is a need to improve consistency around city policies so amount of canopy, whether that canopy is equitably distributed, that current practices are included in the code and relevant characteristics of the tree population such as size distribution, policies that live outside of the code are cross referenced, species diversity, and condition, and even characteristics about specifically Napa's Tree Removal And Posting Policy and Tree tree planting sites such as suitability and soil volume. Within "The Trees" category, Napa rated 17% of indicators as low, 61% as moderate, and 22% as high.
25 -
Indicators of a Sustainable Urban Forest Assessed Performance Level
SUMMARY OF NAPA'S ASSESSMENT OF THE
Low Moderate High
INDICATORS OF A SUSTAINABLE URBAN FOREST:
The Trees Urban Tree Canopy
Equitable Distribution
Size/Age Distribution
Condition of Public Trees - Streets, Parks
15%
Condition of Publicly-Owned Natural Areas
Low
Trees on Private Property
Species Diversity
62% Suitability
Moderate Soil Volume
The Players Neighborhood Action
Large Private and Institutional Landholder Involvement
23%
Green Industry Involvement
High City Department/Agency Cooperation
Funder Engagement
Utility Engagement
NAPA'S SUSTAINABLE Public Awareness
URBAN FOREST INDICATORS Regional Collaboration
The Tree Inventory
Management Canopy Assessment
• Low • Moderate • High Approach Management Plan
Risk Management Program
0% Maintenance of Publicly-Owned Trees (ROWS)
100%
23% 22% 69% 38% Maintenance of Publicly-Owned Natural Areas 90%
Planting Program
80%
Tree Protection Policy
70% 62% 61%
58% City Staffing and Equipment
60%
Funding
50% Disaster Preparedness and Response
40% Resilience
30% Communications
31%
20% Totals The Trees 17% 61% 22%
10% 15% 17% The Players 31% 69% 0%
0% The Management Approach 4% 58% 38%
Overall Trees Players Management Grand Totals 15% 62% 23% Figure 11. Summary of Napa's Assessment of the Indicators of a Sustainable Urban Forest able 5. Napa's Assessed Levels in the Sustainability Indicators in The Trees, The Players, and The Managemer (as defined by Clark et al 1997 and Kenney et al 2011). pproach categories. (Indicators that were rated in between two levels are shown with both columns filled in
SEEN TORONTO
26 Existing Plans and Studies environmental impacts of the General Plan Update and establishes the framework for future project review under Napa's existing plans and studies were reviewed to explore their California Environmental Quality Act. The report addresses current regard to trees or the urban forest. The following ranking Storm Response public and agency comments, particularly concerns about of how well trees are incorporated into each document was used: On February 2, 2024, Napa faced a tree impacts and habitat protection, noting that all future development will remain subject to permitting requirements severe storm that brought high winds, for oak woodlands and riparian communities. intense rainfall, and widespread damage throughout the community. Within hours,
How to Integrate:
Trees Are That Are Trees emergency calls flooded in reporting This Plan highlights and supports the General Plan's tree-related Mentioned Incorporated That Are Fully downed trees, blocked roads, flooding, goals by setting measurable canopy targets and promoting But Lack Clear But Require Incorporated utility outages, and damage to homes and updates to city guiding documents and standards related to tree Actionable Revision Or and vehicles. The City responded to 164 tree Implementation Implementation Implemented planting and maintenance. Focused integration is especially Steps relevant in the downtown area including Jefferson Street, and related issues in a two-day period. Despite Soscol South, where the General Plan envisions expanded canopy. the magnitude of the storm, the City of Napa responded quickly and efficiently.
The review also considered relevance to this Urban Forestry Hazard Mitigation Plan * Public Works, Parks, Utilities, Fire, and Management Plan and answers the question "how can the City Police Departments worked in close Napa's Hazard Mitigation Plan highlights both the benefits and integrate each document into this Plan?" Integrating future risks associated with trees in relation to natural hazards. It notes coordination by deploying crews, setting planning efforts with this Plan is a best practice in integrating the that tree planting can positively influence air quality and regulate up barricades, clearing roadways, and many services provided by the City. For example, strategically the local climate. At the same time, it acknowledges that trees collaborating with the local utility company
integrating urban forestry into infrastructure and development may present hazards such as (1) damage to infrastructure and to address critical hazards such as downed initiatives allows the City to (1) incorporate appropriately blocking evacuation routes during extreme events, such as tree statured trees to minimize infrastructure conflicts moving power lines. The speed and scope of the failure during floods or windstorms and (2) potential fuel sources forward and (2) leverage trees and vegetation for stormwater response prevented injuries, minimized for wildfires, underscoring the importance of the City's ongoing management, air quality improvement, and overall property damage, and restored order fuel reduction projects.
environmental sustainability. across the city within a short timeframe.
How to Integrate:
General Plan * * * The success of the City's response to This Plan further expands upon the environmental benefits of the storm was made possible by rapid,
Adopted in 2022, the Napa 2040 General Plan establishes long- trees and supports goals and actions within the Hazard Mitigation Plan around tree maintenance. Recommendations for cross-departmental communication and term community goals and emphasizes sustainability, livability, proactive tree trimming and cost share programs for private a well executed emergency operations and resilience. Trees are recognized as infrastructure critical for landowners can bridge both documents together for long term framework. This event underscored the enhancing streetscapes, historic neighborhoods, public health, and climate resilience. It also highlights habitat preservation, success. The Tree Canopy and Land Cover Assessment included City's preparedness, responsiveness, canopy expansion, and equitable distribution of tree benefits as a wildfire risk analysis and identified areas of the community at and collaborative strength. key priorities. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City higher risk based on tree canopy metrics. of Napa's General Plan Housing Element evaluates the
27 Parks and Facilities Master Plan * Napa County Voluntary Oak Woodlands • Planting Standards * *. These documents lay out standards Management Plan (2010) <* for planting and staking a nursery tree. Planting standard The Park and Facilities Master Plan, adopted in 2010, outlines a notes detail contractors' responsibilities and step by step 15+ year strategy for enhancing Napa's parks and recreation Napa County has the highest proportion of oak woodlands in instructions for the planting standards diagram.
system, building on the Envision Napa 2020 General Plan. California. The voluntary plan supports conservation and • Root Guard Barrier Specifications *. Planting standard T-5 Covering 800 acres of parks and open space, it emphasizes restoration of oak resources by creating stewardship programs, has a diagram and step-by-step instructions to installing root community needs, recreation opportunities, and collaboration directing funding to high-value oak woodlands, mitigating guard barriers. with the Napa Valley Unified School District. Trees are recognized development impacts, and promoting canopy expansion through • Parks and Landscape Standard Details . These provide a as vital to creating inviting spaces, providing shade and comfort, land use planning and technical assistance. set of standardized design specifications intended to guide the supporting natural habitats, and delivering environmental and development and maintenance of parks and landscaped public recreational benefits. How to Integrate:
areas. The details include requirements for irrigation, backflow This plan recommends tree preservation incentives and voluntary devices, tree bubblers and metal bollards, decomposed granite How to Integrate: significant tree designations, both of which should be applied to for trails and standard clearances for trees near those trails.
This Plan aligns with Park and Facilities Master Plan by oak woodland management and preservation strategies. prioritizing tree planting, preservation, and maintenance in parks Coordination with land use and transportation planning can How to Integrate:
to maximize shade, biodiversity, and resilience. Integration ensure consistency between the two organization's objectives. This Plan recommends updating Planting Standard T-1 to reflect should include recognizing trees as assets, not just amenities. current best management practices. Revisions should include California Oak Woodlands Conservation Act reviewing planting depth and watering pipe placement. This Plan Climate Emergency Resolution ** of 2001 €* recommends alternative approaches to tree and infrastructure conflicts that prioritize tree health and urban resilience (e.g., The Napa City Council resolution declares a climate emergency Passed in 2001, the Act supports voluntary, long-term developing specifications for the installation of structural soils, and commits the City to urgent action. It recognizes the scientific stewardship of oak woodlands, recognizing their ecological, cultural, and agricultural value. It incentivizes conservation on suspended pavement systems, and permeable pavements to evidence of global warming, sets a goal of achieving net zero support healthy root growth in urban settings).
emissions by 2030, and directs that all city planning and policy private lands through financial support and encourages planning decisions be evaluated through a climate lens. The City Manager consistent with oak woodland preservation. is tasked with updating the General Plan to include climate goals, recommending budget and staffing resources to implement How to Integrate:
them, and developing partnerships with community groups, This Plan should incorporate oak woodland preservation by businesses, schools, and regional entities to educate and identifying priority areas for canopy preservation and mobilize support for sustained climate action. enhancement as well as aligning incentives with stewardship programs. The Plan can serve as a tool to extend the acts How to Integrate: conservation framework to urban settings and grant funding This Plan can align with the Climate Emergency Resolution by could be explored to lessen the financial burden on the city. highlighting the City's 2030 net-zero goals, cross-referencing them where appropriate, and framing trees as a key tool for Standard Plans * - ** climate mitigation and resilience, and support the engagement Overall, the standards are designed to create consistency across of organizations, businesses, and schools through education and projects, support long-term durability and maintenance, and outreach to help advance climate action.
ensure compliance with regulatory and community expectations. 28 Tree Removal and Posting Policy &* How to Integrate: systems (e.g., pipes and drains) by providing design options that This Plan can adopt re-oaking principles by prioritizing oaks in use trees and planters to intercept and filter rainfall, such as The policy regulates tree removals based on conditions such as species selection guidelines, specifically in natural areas, riparian bioswales and stormwater tree pits. death, disease, hazards, or construction conflicts. Alternatives to corridors, and restoration zones. Integration also applies to the removal must be considered, and notification requirements vary Tree Manual canopy connectivity study locating areas where planting would by circumstance, with opportunities for public protest. enhance connectivity across the community.
Replacement is required to ensure canopy continuity. A Tree Manual would serve as a guide for planting, caring for, and protecting trees within the community. It would establish Napa Stream Maintenance Manual
How to Integrate: clear standards and best practices, meant for use by city staff, This Plan can strengthen the policy through a review process The manual outlines strategies for invasive tree and plant developers, contractors, and residents alike, helping ensure that that recommends the City incorporate compensatory planting / management, as well as maintenance of riparian trees to trees are planted correctly and maintained for long-term health. tree replacement guidelines and links removal decisions to balance flood risk, habitat protection, and invasive species By offering science-based guidelines, the manual supports canopy goals. It should also integrate communication protocols control. It emphasizes selective removal, use of mechanical/ consistent decision-making, serves as an educational resource for public engagement on tree removals. chemical techniques, and the need for adaptive management for residents and community groups, making it easier for based on site conditions. everyone to contribute to the growth of a resilient and Tree Preservation Standard * * sustainable tree canopy.
How to Integrate:
The standards are designed to protect and promote the long-term This Plan incorporates invasive species management standards Planting Plan health of public trees (in rights-of-way, easements, and public consistent with the Stream Manual. Coordination between flood risk property) and designated Significant Trees on private property from A tree planting plan uses data from the tree inventory and the reduction and urban forestry goals will allow tree planting efforts to damage during construction and post-construction measures. support biodiversity while maintaining safe channel function. tree canopy and land cover assessment to prioritize tree planting in areas of greatest need. A planting plan would be a one- to five- How to Integrate: year plan that builds off of the current planting and removal This Plan can set goals to further integrate tree protection during STANDARD PLANS NOT CURRENTLY activities performed by the City. Industry standard guidelines construction into the Tree Preservation Standard and municipal IN PLACE recommend planting, at minimum, the same number of street code. The plan development process also includes a review that trees that are removed each year to preserve tree canopy cover. recommends updates to better align the city's current practices The City of Napa is meeting this standard and currently with industry standards. This section provides a description of common plans Napa plants approximately 180 community trees per year, mostly currently does not have and how they could benefit the urban to address removals. A planting plan would allow the city to ReOaking North Bay ** forest upon development and implementation. address broader city goals through tree planting like canopy connectivity, equity, and help minimize negative hardscape This regional initiative seeks to restore valley oak and associated Storm Water Management Plan oak species lost to development. Its goals include re-establishing interactions. A tree planting plan can be incorporated when A Storm Water Management Plan serves as a guide in best developing a management plan or as a standalone document. sustainable oak populations, improving wildlife connectivity, management practices for stormwater runoff, with the goal of ensuring climate and fire resilience, and restoring areas of oak loss through node expansion, corridor creation, and meeting federal standards for water quality and the Genera Plan's goals in restoring the Napa River watershed. This plar population protection.
should integrate the urban forest with traditional engineered 29 66
"We have to realize that the climate is changing. Trees provide many important services—shade, sequestering
carbon, cooling our streets to support alternative
transportation. We need to do everything in our power to preserve mature trees and plant additional trees."
- Community Survey Respondent
30 COMMUNITY AND • The Community Outreach Advisory Committee consisted of STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT the Project Team and Napa Resource Conservation District. • The Parks, Recreation, and Trees Advisory Commission
SECTION 2: (PRTAC) was engaged throughout the planning process.
A critical component of the development of Napa's Urban Forestry Management Plan was engaging the City's staff, During the development of the Plan, items were brought
WHAT DO
stakeholder groups, and residents to understand the issues, to the PRTAC:
opportunities, and challenges they see regarding their
WE WANT? community's trees and urban forest as a whole. The information • October 2021 - Application to the 2021/2022 Urban and and feedback received during City Staff, Community, and Community Forestry Grant Program • May 2022 - CAL FIRE Urban & Community Forestry
Stakeholder Engagement informed the Plan's themes,
recommendations, and action items. Grant Award
• November 2023 - Project update
City Staff and Stakeholder Engagement • April 2024 - Stakeholder interview discussion • November 2024 - Plan reporting on the tree inventory/ Engagement was conducted through a series of interviews, canopy cover assessment meetings, and a questionnaire shared with the following groups • February 2025 - Plan input on priority planting areas and within the City of Napa: private property owner engagement • August 2025 - Review and approval of updated Master
• Parks and Recreation Services Street Tree List
• Public Works (Construction, Engineering, Private Projects, • January 2026 - Partial Plan draft review (executive summary, Public Projects, Operations, and Utilities) vision, and goals) • Economic Development (Long Range Policies, Climate, • February 2026- Plan review Planning)
• Risk Management Community Engagement
And the following external stakeholders: The community was engaged through an online survey, a series of community meetings and pop-up events, volunteer tree • Napa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District planting events, and educational workshops. • Parks, Recreation, and Trees Advisory Commission
• Napa County Public Works Community Meeting
• CAL FIRE The project team hosted a hybrid (virtual and in-person) community meeting on June 19, 2024 from 4:30-7pm to kick-off Advisory Bodies the community engagement portion of the Plan.
Advisory bodies met with the consultants and/or the City of Napa Project Team to provide input on their respective elements The community meeting included a presentation from the of expertise regarding community outreach, potential urban consultants that explained the current tree cover across the forestry policy changes. community, the community tree resource, and the Plan 31 development process. After the presentation, there was a Day in locations to capture the input of community members Benefits of Trees question-and-answer session and an open house with who might not otherwise attend a meeting. These events also • The top benefits of trees identified by survey respondents are posterboards showing tree canopy cover. During the open house include providing tree care educations to the community. shade (23%), climate change mitigation (18%), wildlife portion, City staff were available to allow for discussion and habitat (17%), air quality improvement (12%), aesthetics more specific questions. The meeting presentation was recorded Educational Information (11%), and support for mental and physical health (9%). and posted on the City's website for reference. The survey revealed interest in the importance of trees as well as guidance on tree planting and care. The project included the Challenges with Trees Online Survey development of several education handouts as well as updates • The top consequences caused by trees identified by survey The Napa Urban Forestry Management Plan Community Survey to existing tree species list and city standards. respondents are infrastructure conflicts such as damage to was open from June 19-August 19, 2024. Digital versions of the sidewalks (27%), tree/limb failure and the potential damage survey were offered in English and Spanish. A total of 147 people A goal of the Plan was to provide educational information to the caused by it (23%), litter from leaves, seeds, sap, fruit, etc. responded to the survey, which asked a range of questions community. The City created a web-page dedicated to the Plan (12%), costs of maintenance or removal (10%), allergens (9%), about Napa's trees and their benefits and challenges to identify to provide updates to the community and a central location for and fire danger (8%). themes and priorities that should be considered during plan educational information. Information was posted throughout the process, and included links to recorded workshops, the survey, Tree Planting development. The survey explored public opinions on the past, present, and future of the urban forest, the city's effectiveness in educational materials, and the Plan. • Some survey respondents (40%) would be willing to plant trees maintaining it, attitudes toward trees and new plantings, and the on their private property, while others feel that they already benefits considered most valuable. Overall, responses were Volunteer Planting Events have enough trees (27%) or don't have enough space (16%).
The City of Napa Project Team and NRCD held Volunteer Planting • The greatest barriers to survey respondents planting new positive toward trees and expanding the urban forest canopy.
The complete results are available in Appendix E. Events to provide community members with hands-on trees on their private property are financial resources and a opportunities to help implement some of the goals identified in lack of information on species selection (17% each).
Educational Information and Workshops the Plan.
The City partnered with Napa Resource Conservation District What did we hear during community engagement?
(NRCD), a local district that supports conservation and natural resource management throughout the county, on community Citywide Trees and Tree Canopy engagement while developing the Plan. NRCD supported all of • Nearly two-thirds of survey respondents (65%) agree that the outreach and education initiatives while developing the plan. there are too few trees in Napa, while a third (33%) feel that These events include two evening workshops focusing on there are the right amount of trees. policies around tree's and another meeting titled "Right Tree • The vast majority of survey respondents (90%) agree that Right Place'. trees growing in Napa's public right-of-way are important. • Among survey respondents with trees growing on their private Pop-Up Events property, nearly all (93%) agreed that private property trees NRCD held two pop-up events to provide educational are important to them. opportunities for community members interested in learning • Most Napa survey respondents feel that having large trees more about trees and providing feedback on Napa's current and where they live is a privilege (45%) or a part of living in future urban forest. Pop-ups were held on Arbor Day and Earth Napa (28%), while a smaller portion feel negatively towards large trees (8%).
32 Tree Preservation
• When determining which trees should be preserved, Napa NAPA COMMUNITY SURVEY RESPONSE HIGHLIGHTS survey respondents rated all criteria similarly, but the most important criteria include the tree's environmental benefits, location, and wildlife habitat value (17% each).
100%
City Tree Management 93%
90%
• Most survey respondents (56%) are satisfied with the
60%
current level of care for City street trees. 65%
• Survey respondents feel that the most important services offered 56% 45%
by Napa's Parks and Recreation Services Department's Trees 40% 20%
and Parks Division are tree pruning (30%) and planting (27%), followed by the neighborhood sidewalk repair program (23%). • If additional funding was available, the maintenance type that Napa has Trees growing on Trees growing in the Having large trees 1am wilingto plant 11am satisfied with the too few trees my private property public right-of-way where I live in new trees on my current level of care survey respondents would most like to be increased is street are important to me are importantto me Napals a privilege private property for city street trees tree replacement (41%), followed by removal of trees
causing sidewalk displacement (24%). Figure 12. Selected responses from the Napa Urban Forestry Community Management Plan Survey. The complete responses are available in Appendix E. • Most survey respondents (89%) have never pulled a permit for tree work, but among those who have, half felt the process went smoothly (50%), others felt the process took too long (38%), and some were unclear about which application to use (13%).
ISSUES, OPPORTUNITIES, THEMES,
Future Community Engagement AND PRIORITIES
The urban forestry topics that survey respondents are most interested in learning more about include species selection "[Trees should be preserved on the The stakeholder and community engagement activities and (21%), current tree regulations in Napa (17%), and general assessment of the Indicators of a Sustainable Urban Forest tree maintenance (16%). basis off health, appropriate tree revealed the following urban forestry themes and priorities in • The best way to share new information with survey planted in appropriate location, Napa. These themes and priorities were integrated into the Plan's respondents is electronic or web-based (26%). recommendations and action items. [and our] ability to maintain."
Value of Urban Trees and Canopy
- COMMUNITY SURVEY Napa residents value and appreciate their urban trees - especially,
RESPONDENT
large, healthy, mature native trees - particularly due to thei benefits in providing shade, reducing urban heat islands sequestering carbon, and providing habitat for wildlife, which esidents feel outweigh the costs of maintaining the trees 33 -
Community Character and Aesthetics Trees as a Public Resource Species and Site Selection Community members agree that having large, mature trees is part of Napa's unique character that needs to be carefully Napa residents value the services that Parks and Recreation Community members feel that there is an overabundance of provides in creating a healthy urban forest in parks and other non-native, invasive, and nuisance species in Napa's urban planned for, maintained, and preserved.
public spaces as a community resource. Residents also value the forest, and that these species should be removed and replaced unique benefits of trees planted along roadways and appreciate with trees that are native to California and/or more tolerant of the services that Parks and Recreation provides to plant and drought conditions. New tree plantings should also focus on maintain trees in rights-of-way. selecting species that are appropriate for Napa's unique environment, while considering the changing climate, water "[Trees are] part of our beauty Tree and Infrastructure Conflicts availability, and increasing fire risk. There is also an interest in enhanced education on this subject, including updating Napa's and quality of life here." Tree health and long-term viability are frequently compromised by conflicts with infrastructure design and insufficient growing - COMMUNITY SURVEY RESPONDENT conditions. Narrow right-of-way (ROW) zones, poor soil volume, Water Resilience
and sidewalk damage from roots are common issues.
Stakeholders called for updated streetscape standards, early Trees are essential to climate adaptation, water conservation, planning coordination, and updated tree protection standards to and ecosystem restoration, but current management practices minimize tree impacts and ensure trees are treated as essential often fall short. Stakeholders expressed concern over Shade and Heat Island Mitigation infrastructure. In general, Napa residents want to have the right mismatches between species and irrigation sources, lack of The most frequently referenced benefit of trees across all tree in the right place and are willing to remove and replace ecological diversity, and limited alignment between urban community survey questions was their ability to provide shade, them when they are not. Many community members expressed forestry and watershed management. Opportunities exist to desire for the removal and replacement of trees for various integrate trees more fully into resilience planning. cool neighborhoods, reduce the urban heat island effect, and even encourage alternative forms of transportation by keeping reasons, including safety hazards, infrastructure conflicts, and trails cooler. inappropriate species or site selection.
Carbon Capture and Climate Change
Napa residents would like to see trees planted in a way that will allow them to grow to their maximum potential and store as much carbon as possible. Community members would also like to see trees integrated into Napa's other climate/carbon goals "Shade trees and urban forests will play an increasingly important role with and policies.
extreme heat and the need for shade along public streets/sidewalks, Habitat and Ecosystem Benefits particularly for kids walking to/from school and other vulnerable Napa residents deeply value the benefits of trees to other populations."
wildlife, particularly pollinators, and would like to see trees planted in an intentional way that makes them a part of a - COMMUNITY SURVEY RESPONDENT
complete healthy ecosystem.
34 Tree Preservation vs. Removal and Replacement needed but is not being provided because it is too costly, so Barriers to Maintaining Trees on Public Property Amidst Development Pressures additional funding or resources are necessary.
Stakeholders highlighted ongoing challenges around tree care While there is an openness to removing and replacing many trees, Need for More Data Tracking responsibilities, especially after initial planting. For example, the exception is large, mature trees that are healthy and actively maintenance after installation is not required by code, and there are providing community benefits. Stakeholders consistently Stakeholders expressed that there is a strong need for better not clear roles for tree installation, watering, pruning. Without dearly emphasized the community's deep attachment to native, mature data systems to support tree management. The lack of a defined maintenance roles or consistent standards, tree survival and trees and the challenges of balancing the public's desire for tree centralized inventory or digital tracking hinders planning, performance vary widely. The reliance on property owners to preservation with safety and development needs. Concerns evaluation, and transparency. Stakeholders called for tools like maintain public trees also raises equity concerns, particularly in included inconsistent or unclear information around decision an inventory asset management system and emphasized the under-resourced neighborhoods, as tree survival varies based on making frameworks (e.g., tree removal and protection policies). importance of regular monitoring and evidence-based protocols neighborhood capacity.
Survey respondents also expressed disappointment that in some to guide removal and investment decisions. locations, trees were removed and never replaced. Costs, benefits, Barriers to Planting Trees on Private Property and potential risk need to be evaluated when determining Need for More Education While some residents are willing to plant new trees on private whether to preserve or remove and replace trees. While removal Community members and stakeholders alike expressed a desire property, many are unable to due to a lack of available planting space, is sometimes necessary, there's a need for clear communication, for more education about trees - especially selecting appropriate being a renter, or living in an HOA that prohibits it. The main barriers proactive management, and engagement around current (and species and designing appropriate planting sites during early cited by survey respondents were a lack of financial resources and/or desired future) preservation policies.
planning phases. Persistent public confusion around tree education about what kind of trees to plant and how. Some residents ownership, maintenance responsibilities, and city policies points are also concerned that existing trees are not getting enough water Targeted Tree Plantings
to the need for improved outreach. There is also a need for and are wary of planting new trees due to a lack of water availability.
Community members expressed a desire for more trees to be more education around pruning practices and encouraging planted throughout Napa, especially to replace mature hazardous proper techniques to promote optimal structure throughout the trees that needed to be removed and in low-canopy areas, along life of the tree. rights-of-way, and in underserved neighborhoods. Napa residents would like to see aging trees replaced with more appropriate Need for Code and Policy Review native, drought-tolerant species that are suitable for the size of and Enforcement "I would really like special their planting space.
Tree-related risks-such as sidewalk damage, infrastructure attention for tree planting in
conflicts, and falling limbs-are a growing concern. However, Need for Increased Funding, Staffing Capacity, and enforcement of tree-related codes is often reactive and under- lower income neighborhoods.
Maintenance
resourced. Many stakeholders expressed confusion about
There are areas [...] that have
Napa residents agree that assessing tree health and providing existing tree-related codes, roles, and responsibilities and cited the maintenance necessary to keep trees healthy is one of the legal ambiguity, limited staffing, and unclear ownership as major little to no trees on some of most important services that the City provides. However, some barriers to effective risk mitigation and code compliance. Current those streets."
residents are concerned that Napa's trees - especially large, ordinances are seen as fragmented, outdated, or unclear-both mature trees - are not receiving adequate maintenance in order to staff and the public. There is broad support for policy reform to remain healthy, and would like to see an increase in services. to improve clarity, expand protections, and provide better tools - COMMUNITY SURVEY RESPONDENT Many survey respondents felt that additional maintenance is for enforcement and long-term tree management. 35 "[Having large trees where I live] is one of the main reasons why we chose Napa - large trees bring
beauty (healing for humans), reduce air pollution,
and provide essential carbon removal."
- Community Survey Respondent
36 The goals, recommendations, and action items of this Plan are Although numerous recommendations in this Plan necessitate the based on various information and data gathered and analyzed allocation of City resources and effort, the plan also presents during the planning process, including Napa's: opportunities for active involvement from residents, stakeholders, SECTION 3: and other City and external partners. Encouraging collaboration • Assessment of the Indicators of a Sustainable Urban Forest and participation from these groups can significantly contribute HOW DO WE • Tree Planting and Care memo to the successful implementation of the Plan. • Resource Analysis of the community tree inventory
• Tree Canopy and Land Cover Assessment
GET THERE? • Review of the City's Tree Ordinances (municipal code section Key
12.44 and 12.45)
• Discussions surrounding existing policies (the Tree
Preservation Standard and Tree Removal and Posting Policy) Departments Involved in Implementation • Themes and priorities identified during community (Depts. Involved) engagement and stakeholder meetings • Parks and Recreational Services (PRS) • Public Works (PW)
They were also informed by feedback received during the • Legal community engagement and outreach events. • Economic Development (Planning) Timeline to Begin the Implementation of the Action
Four main recommendations are provided to help guide Napa in (Timeline)
achieving each of the Parks and Recreation Department's identified In progress, 1-3 years, 4+ years
goals to Preserve, Protect, Promote, and Plan for the City's trees and the future of their urban forest. For each goal, a vision statement Funding and brief description of current conditions and needs are provided, as "$" Implementations is achievable with existing resources well as recommendations to help the City achieve their goals. The "$$" Existing resources may be used to further these
action items listed in the table that follows are potential steps that can goals, while full implementation will likely need
be taken to support the implementation of each recommendation. additional resources "$$$" Implementation would need additional resources
ACTION AND IMPLEMENTATION likely through council action Each Goal presents recommendations and action items as well as an implementation plan that includes details on the departments involved, timeline, and funding needs. While the strategy provides general, short-term timeframes, it is essential for the plan's implementation to remain adaptable and dynamic. This flexibility allows for adjustments in response to evolving needs, priorities, available resources, and opportunities within Napa.
37 GOALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Goal Recommendations
Provide ongoing, proactive maintenance to trees throughout all stages of their life cycles to maximize chance of successful 1-1 establishment and optimize tree health, growth, and community benefits Preserve large, healthy, mature trees whenever possible to maximize and sustain community benefits Plan and prepare for invasive and nuisance species including plants, pests, and pathogens to protect Napa's urban forest Preserve
Increase genus and species diversity in new and replacement tree plantings to increase resiliency in the urban forest and reduce reliance on the most prevalent species
Evaluate Parks and Urban Forestry Division staffing and resources to keep up with the City's forestry program needs (asset management and maintenance, administrative, regulatory framework, education and outreach, and visioning) Identify gaps in existing tree planting, maintenance, and preservation standards in the City's municipal code; make updates 2-1
wnere necessary
Ensure that tree-related policies in any other relevant City documents, such as the Approved Street Tree List, Street Tree 2-2 Planting Specifications, Tree Preservation Standard, and Tree Removal and Posting Policy, are up to date, aligned with, and referenced in the municipal code and other City planning documents Protect
Develop new standards and educational materials to address issues affecting Napa's urban forest that are not included in 2-3 current city code or policies
Communicate important information about the benefits and maintenance needs of Napa's community trees to the genera 3-1 public, private property owners, potential partners, funders, and decisionmakers Engage community members in the decisionmaking process around current and future tree management and planting to 3-2
encourage community buy-in and support
Promote
Strengthen and develop partnerships with residents, nonprofit groups, organizations, private sector companies, developers, 3-3
potential funders, and similar communities to share knowledge and resources and work together to promote Napa's trees Develop a functional and sustainable urban forestry management program with adequate staffing, resources, and support 4-1 from other City partners
4-2 Manage existing tree and infrastructure conflicts in Napa's urban forest and prevent future tree and infrastructure conflicts Plan
Plant, replace, and preserve trees at strategic levels and locations around the City to align with Napa's canopy goals, achieve an equitable distribution of tree canopy, and ensure consistent canopy coverage as older trees reach the end of their useful life Develop and implement standardized data tracking processes for the City's tree inventory, canopy, and Urban Forestry Management Plan goals and action items
Table 6. Goals and Recommendations Overview.
38 PRESERVE Provide ongoing, proactive maintenance to trees throughout all stages of their life cycles to maximize chance of successful establishment and optimize tree health, growth, and community benefits Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
Vision Implement industry standards when selecting. planting, and providing establishment care (irrigation, mulch, and PRS In progress
Trees are an integral part of the community and key to the staking) for new trees health and character of neighborhoods, parks, and streets RS an Consider contracting out a portion of maintenance needs to achieve annual pruning and maintenance goals ublic Work In progress $$ across Napa. Preserving healthy trees and ensuring young trees can grow to reach their full canopy potential will Provide regular inspection, structural pruning for young trees, and a routine pruning cycle for all City-maintained PRS and 4+ years $$
contribute to the overall health of the urban forest. Tree trees to make the urban forestry program more proactive Public Works preservation will be supported by encouraging practices aiming Schedule and assign work based on the level of need (high-priority tree work is to be completed as soon as possi PRS 1-3 years
to effectively sustain existing trees throughout their life cycle. ble and before lower priority work) Table 7-1. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 1-1 in Napa's Preserve goal.
Description
A tree's ability to reach maturity and provide its full potential depends on proper planting and consistent care throughout Preserve large, healthy, mature trees whenever possible to maximize and sustain community benefits its lifespan. To support long-term health, safety, and return on investment, Napa should adopt best management practices Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding and align its operations with industry standards for species Protect and maintain trees and desirable forest stands, focus preservation efforts on trees that are especially PRS and In progress and nursery stock selection, planting and establishment care, important in Napa, such as: existing healthy and mature trees, significant trees, and protected native trees as Planning routine inspections and pruning cycles, and integrated pest defined in Municipal Code Chapter 12.45 management. These practices will give City-managed trees Continue to protect important trees on city property by creating a designation for mature and desirable public PRS and Public In progress trees to increase visibility of the City's urban forestry program Works the best chance of successful establishment, long-term health, and longevity. Additionally, whenever possible, Napa Table 7-2. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 1-2 in Napa's Preserve goal. should aim to preserve healthy, mature trees of desirable species on both public and private property since they
provide the greatest community benefits. Plan and prepare for invasive and nuisance species including plants, pests, and pathogens to protect Napa's urban forest Themes Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
• Trees as a Public Resource
Develop strategies for managing invasive and nuisance species and pest and pathogens across public and PRS 4+ years $s • Tree and Infrastructure Conflicts private properties, such as monitoring, management, collaborations, and education • Species and Site Selection
Protect culturally important species such as oaks and habitats such as riparian areas, which are threatened by PRS and 4+ years ss • Water Resilience some of the pests of greatest concern for Napa's community forest Planning • Need for Increased Funding, Staffing Capacity,
Follow integrated pest management and best management practices, when monitoring for and dealing with PRS In progress and Maintenance invasive and nuisance species (identify the most appropriate procedures and protocols, ensure proper training • Need for More Data Tracking and licensing)
• Barriers to Planting Trees on Private Property Table 7-3. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 1-3 in Napa's Preserve goal. 39 Increase genus and species diversity in new and replacement tree plantings to increase resiliency in the urban forest and reduce reliance on the most prevalent species
Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
Continue to align species selection with the requirements Napa's approved species list "Master Street Tree List", PRS In progress $ including considerations for tree stature and planting space size Use the community tree resource data to reduce the planting of overutilized species that exceed the "10-20-30" PRS In progress rule for species diversity and monitor species performance Increase resilience in the urban forest by planting species that perform well in local and regional conditions PRS In progress (climate, wildfire, pests and pathogen threats), including introducing new species that indicate promising traits and avoiding species identified as invasive
Expand the planting of appropriate native species and species that are resistant to local threats such as drought, PRS In progress fire, and regional pests while avoiding planting invasive and problematic species Use new and replacement tree plantings to improve diversity, increase benefits, and support an ideal age PRS In progress $ distribution of community trees
• Prioritize planting replacement trees after community tree removals to maintain the current stocking level PRS In progress $ i. Consider integrating xeriscape programs with the tree replacement program (wherein residents plant the trees with PRS 4+ years $$ development mitigation fund)
• Prepare planting plans that help the City track the community tree resource of stocking levels and changes in species PRS 1-3 years and genera abundance
i. Maximize available resources and planting space by planting the largest statured tree that can be accommodated in a PRS In progress $ site where space and design allow. Implement right tree, right place principles and incorporate large statured trees where feasible.
i. Areas with existing bare soil and grass/low-ying vegetation identified in the Canopy Assessment can be further PRS and 1-3 years analyzed for consideration for expanding canopy cover through tree planting Public Works Table 7-4. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 1-4 in Napa's Preserve goal. 40 Evaluate Parks and Urban Forestry Division staffing and resources to keep up with the City's forestry program needs (asset management and maintenance, administrative, regulatory framework, education and outreach, and visioning) ACTION SPOTLIGHT:
Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding STAFFING AND
RESOURCES
Address resource shortages, expand in-house staffing, and/or increase contracted work to respond to Napa's $$ PRS 4+ years
routine and emergency tree maintenance needs in a proactive manner • Utilize the data in the public tree inventory Resource Analysis and work plans to predict upcoming tree maintenance Proactive management is at the core of any successful PRS In progress $
and budgetary needs
urban forestry program. When trees are regularly
Align funding with the long-term maintenance needs of trees and infrastructure in order to preserve tree $ inspected and maintained, they can grow larger, live PRS
benefits, prolong tree life, and manage risk and public safety. longer, have greater vitality and provide more benefits • Review and update landscape assessment district funding structures to address chronic underfunding and reliance on throughout their lifespans. However, the ability of any PRS 1-3 years $$
General Fund subsidies
urban forestry department to operate on a proactive
i. Consider subsidized maintenance in equity-priority areas PRS 4+ years $5 cycle is dependent upon having adequate staffing and resources available to complete the work necessary
• Integrate the City's tree maintenance budget into citywide planning efforts; consider funding from the capital and PRS and PW $ In progress within the given timeframe.
operating budgets and the Parks general fund and Planning • Communicate the cost of proactive maintenance to City Council and the community. PRS In progress $ For example, approximately 800 community trees are pruned each year. Current annual pruning practices are
• Explore additional funding for tree planting, replacement, and maintenance in parks and public spaces PRS In progress $$ only able to address a portion of the pruning needs of community trees.
i. Consider bonding or performance guarantees for tree establishment PRS 4+ years $$ Studies have shown that when tree maintenance is
Continue planned fleet replacement and equipment acquisition aligned with operational needs; address PRS and Public In progress $$ delayed, both the amount of effort required and costs to corresponding equipment needs as staffing levels increase Works complete the tasks steadily increase (Browning and
Table 7-5. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 1-5 in Napa's Preserve goal. Wiant 1997, Vogt et al 2015), whereas shifting from a reactive, request-based system such as Napa's to a
systematic maintenance cycle could reduce costs by as
much as 50% (AECOM 2013, Cascadia Consulting
Group, 2001).
PICNIC SITE
41 -
Identify gaps in existing tree planting, maintenance, and preservation standards in the City's municipal code; PROTECT make updates where necessary
Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
Update Municipal Code Title 12 Chapter 44 Public Trees and Plants to codify current practices PRS, PW Vision (specifically within Napa's Tree Removal And Posting Policy and Tree Preservation standards) 4t years $ and eliminate contradictions accross tree-related codes and policies and Legal Tree protection policies programs and education are
instrumental in establishing best practices that ensure • expand 12.44 to include protection of public trees during construction, tree protection zones, PRS, PW and requirements for tree planting and compensatory planting and Legal 4t years the existing canopy cover is nurtured, enhanced, and
protected for current residents and future generations. PRS, PW i. Define and require permitting processes for protection during construction 4t years and Legal
Description . Establish a formal permitting and approval process that requires the submission and approval The City's ability to protect its tree canopy is dependent of a tree protection plan for public trees that would be impacted by construction activities prior PRS and Public Works 1-3 years
upon having policies in place that are both effective and to the commencement of construction activities enforceable. In addition to clearly defining the required • Include relevant language from current policies and standards (e.g., Street Tree Removal and Notification Policy and Tree Preservation Standard), such as criteria for evaluating removal requests and notification requirements PRS In progress practices and protections that apply to Napa's public
and significant or protected private trees, these policies PRS and • Reference the most current guide on tree appraisals when determining penalties for illegal need to be understood and applied by City staff, 1-3 years $ tree removals Planning
contractors, and private property owners alike.
Review Municipal Code Title 12 Chapter 45 Trees on Private Property (12.45), consider the current strength of Revisions and additions to Napa's Public Tree PRS and Legal 4+ years private tree protections and potential integration with 12.44 when possible Ordinance (12.44), Tree Preservation Standard (12.45),
• Solicit community input on changes to current private tree protection policies and community priorities; then match and other relevant documents should focus on PRS 1-3 years $$ urban forestry program needs to community desires
eliminating potential sources of confusion, aligning
regulations across all City codes and policies, removing i. Encourage the protection of trees on private property, consider incentives for private residents PRS 1-3 years
to promote tree maintenance
content that is unnecessary or burdensome to the City,
and adding new content that promotes public safety Collaborate with the Public Works Department to create a sidewalk or hardscape ordinance that meets tree PRS, PW 4+ years protection and infrastructure goals, cross reference it in 12.44 and Legal and tree benefits while enhancing protections for both
public and private trees. Consider codifying a requirement to enhance canopy coverage on new developments (including parking lots), and establish clear, enforceable maintenance requirements that prioritize long-term establishment care and PRS and Planning 1-3 years
tree performance in Municipal Code Title 16 Subdivisions Chapter 36 Design and Improvement Standards Themes
• Trees as a Public Resource
Table 8-1. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 2-1 in Napa's Protect goal. • Tree and Infrastructure Conflicts
• Tree Preservation vs. Removal and Replacement
Amidst Development Pressures
• Need for More Education
• Need for Code and Policy Review and Enforcement
• Barriers to Maintaining Trees on Public Property
42 Ensure that tree-related policies in any other relevant City documents, such as the Approved Street Tree List, Street Tree Planting Specifications, Tree Preservation Standard, and Tree Removal and Posting Policy, are up to date, aligned with, and referenced in the municipal code and other City planning documents Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
Regularly update the City's approved tree species list "Napa's Master Street Tree List" PRS In progress $ • Reference the approved species list in the General Plan PRS and Planning 1-3 years $ • Consider changing the name of "Napa's Master Street Tree List" to the "City's Approved Tree List", which is how the list is referred to in the PRS In progress $ Tree Removal and Replacement Policy
Update the Street Tree Planting Specifications and Root Guard Barrier Specifications in the engineering standards (update the planting depth, PRS and 1-3 years $
placement of watering pipes and explain the implications of root guards to trees respectively), model the code after the updated versions Public Works Review and update the Tree Removal and Posting Policy PRS In progress $ • Review the standardized set of criteria for tree removals, include metrics for equity such as canopy cover and neighborhood density PRS and Planning 1-3 years $ • Define and require stump removal and a plan for compensatory planting (replacement trees or in lieu of fees) PRS 1-3 years $ • Update the Phased Removal Plan in the Tree Removal and Posting Policy to allow Director discretion and refer to the compensatory planting guidelines. PRS 1-3 years $ • Update references to the Tree Protection Code in the Zoning Ordinance (17.52), and continue to reference documents and codes where appropriate. 1-3 years Update the Preservation Standard to include tree protection during construction, with a diagram of tree protection zones In progress • Remove the requirement for fertilization as a part of post-construction care practices given that it initiates growth rather than defense response PRS In progress
in trees and unintended consequences.
Table 8-2. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 2-2 in Napa's Protect goal. 43 ACTION SPOTLIGHT:
Develop new standards and educational materials to address issues affecting Napa's urban forest that are not included in current city code or policies POLICIES AND GUIDING
DOCUMENTS
Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
Develop a comprehensive tree manual for staff, contractors, and community members to standardize practices PRS $ and promote maintenance, tree protection based on the tree ordinance and industry standards in progress Establishing and enforcing clear guidelines on which trees may or may not be planted in different types of locations • Focus Private Tree Protection and Preservation Recommendations on "Preservation through Education' (eg. City of $ PRS in progress within Napa is the best way to plan for a healthy and Brookings Urban Forest Initiative)
sustainable urban forest in the future. Napa's Species List • Include accessible summaries for content that can be used as outreach materials on the benefits of trees, the tree PRS In progress $ includes information on the trees' characteristics and form, removal process, tree mitigation, tree protection during construction water needs, growth rates, predicted size at maturity,
Integrate trees and planter designs during the development of a City-wide Storm Water PRS and 4+ years recommended grow space, potential to conflict with Management Plan Public Works
hardscapes and utilities, susceptibility to pests, and
PRS and
Require quality nursery stock selection, in accordance with ANSI Standards 1-3 years $ suitability for various uses such as street trees, so that Planning
anyone planting trees can be confident they are putting the Develop an internal Tree Removal and Preservation Decision Guide to clarify thresholds and PRS $ In progress "right tree in the right place." The Species List should be reduce subjectivity
continuously reevaluated and updated as the successes
Develop standards and policies for naturally-maintained areas PRS 1-3 years $5 and challenges of planting various species are observed to ensure that the most up-to-date information available is • Consider additional aspects of management in natural areas, such as managing for wildfire risk reduction, canopy connectivity, water quality, or other activities that promote natural areas as habitat for birds and other wildlife PRS 1-3 years $$ referenced.
PRS and
• Include policies regarding urban forestry goals for public natural areas and park space 4+ years $$S Equally as important as guidance for tree planting is Planning
providing clear regulations on how and when trees may be event the movement of felled tree materials where possible that may be harboring pests or pathogens suc PRS untreated logs, firewood, and woodchi In progress $ removed. By reviewing and updating its Tree Removal and Posting Policy, Napa can establish and enforce consistent, Table 8-3. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 2-3 in Napa's Protect goal. equitable, and science-based rules governing the removal and replacement of nuisance or hazardous trees.
Proposed landscape designs from the General Plan's Land Use and Community Design Element.
44 -
PROMOTE Communicate important information about the benefits and maintenance needs of Napa's community trees 3-1
to the general public, private property owners, potential partners, funders, and decisionmakers Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
Vision
Eringate coromunny my toners bose the asks Nasts tres asid assive messaging that. PRS In progress Each community member can play a role in sustaining a healthy urban forest. Public education and an increased community awareness of the Utilize the data on the community tree inventory and urban forest canopy cover to communica value of trees remains a primary focus. A significant percentage of Napa's munity tree and urban forest benefits (annual stormwater, air quality, and carbon sequest. PRS In progress $ tree canopy is on private property. To build further capacity on private tion) & replacement values property, and position Napa to enhance its tree canopy, increased • Create educational materials for large and institutional landowners to highlight the vital importance to care for these patches of land and convey that tree canopy cover in these areas helps the land PRS 1-3 years $$ community engagement, public education initiatives, and programs and the City as a whole
aimed to incentivize and encourage private planting will be integrated. • Build upon the public-facing digital resource hub: policies, standards tree FAQs, justifications, and PRS In progress
engagement materials
Description
The majority of Napa's urban tree canopy, in terms of both acreage and Promote and/or incentivize tree planting on private property, particularly in low canopy and PRS In progress $$
other high priority planting areas
percent cover, is located within residential-zoned areas, which also • Encourage tree planting and preservation on private property, which makes up 68.9% of land in occupy the largest portion of Napa's total city area. Therefore, efforts to PRS In progress $ Napo, through education and engagement and subsidized planting programs both preserve existing tree canopy and expand canopy with new • Provide incentives for planting climate-ready trees PRS 1-3 years plantings will need to be focused on sharing critical information with homeowners, developers, and other land managers in these areas. By Provide educational resources to property owners about best management practices for tree expanding public outreach efforts with a focus on the value of trees, their selection, planting, establishment care, the need for ongoing maintenance, and tree preserva- PRS In progress tion during development
life cycles and maintenance needs, and best management practices for • Develop materials that explain ownership and data, FAQs on property owner and city responsibilities caring for them, Napa can help ensure that residents are equipped to PRS 1-3 years $ for street trees, codes and permit requirements
help sustain their community's urban tree canopy into the future. The i. Create a responsibility chart distinguishing between public and private obligations for public trees City can further encourage support from the community by involving PRS 1-3 years and private trees
residents in important decisions, such as those pertaining to tree and • Develop materials that explain the lifecycle and full cost of street trees, shared responsibilities, and PRS infrastructure conflicts and tree preservation standards. Additionally, by 1-3 years replacement rationale
forming strategic partnerships with residents and relevant groups, the i. Craft messaging to frame removal and replacement as part of a healthy, managed forest PRS In progress $ City can recruit potential volunteers, sources of funding, and a variety of other benefits that result from collaboration. i. Utilize the inventory of street trees to communicate trees' maintenance needs to adjacent property PRS In progress
owners
Themes Host educational days for residents with demonstrations on tree planting and establishment $ PRS In progress
practices such as slow watering, proper planting techniques, and mulching • Value of Urban Trees and Canopy
Create educational handouts or a manual for residents that describes the importance of tree • Species and Site Selection PRS 1-3 years $$
preservation during development (BMPs, how to set up a TPZ, etc.) • Targeted Tree Planting Develop materials that define tree establishment regulations and guidelines in City code, PRS and Legal 4+ years
• Need for More Education include outreach protocols
• Barriers to Planting Trees on Private Property Table 9-1. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 3-1 in Napa's Promote goal. 45 -
Engage community members in the decisionmaking process around current and future tree management 3-2 and planting to encourage community buy-in and support ACTION SPOTLIGHT:
Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
Continue to engage residents to determine preferences for tree and infrastructure conflic nitigation, including phased or complete tree removals and repairs, alternative designs, anc PRS and $ Public Works In progress Right Tree Right Place Tree Planting Guide planter modifications
Importance of Planting Trees
PRS and $ lanting a tree is more than just adding greenery-it's an investment ir Public Works In progress
infrastructure conflict mitigation leaner air, cooler streets, and a healthier environmen omote education and outreach as a key component when seeking community input o tential changes to Municipal Code (eg. private tree protections 12.45), including what t PRS 1-3 years $$ Right Tree Right Place current regulations are and how the ordinance could be updated, and community priorities The phrase "right tree right place" means choosing a tree species that is well suited to its planting location. It is important to consider matching the tree Table 9-2. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 3-2 in Napa's Promote goal. species to an appropriate planting site.
Steps to Tree Planting
3-3
1. Right Tree In The Right Place
promote Napa's trees
2. Preparing the Hole
Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
3. Removing the Pot
Nonprofits and community groups: (1) Collaborate with organizations that have a struc- tured volunteer program with clearly defined roles and safe activities that can educate PRS 1-3 years $ 4. Positioning the Tree the volunteers and (2) Encourage the development of an urban forestry-related non-profit 5. Backfilling Other environmental organizations: Collaborate with climate groups to include trees into PRS In progress $ 6. Watering their messaging
7.Mulching
Private sector, developers, & potential funders:Explore strategic and corporate partnerships PRS 1-3 years $
8. Staking (If Needed)
• Define and move towards accomplishing shared broad urban forestry goals PRS 4+ years $5$ 9. Long-Term Care • Seek both long and short term resource sharing or funding partnerships to help fund urban PRS 1-3 years $5
forestry events/projects
• Explore opportunities for green waste management and market opportunities for wood PRS 1-3 years $
products
PRS 4+ years 55
and community members in the most efficient way possible and (2) • Collaborate with the City of Davis and other leaders in climate adapted species selection to PRS $ 1-3 years
incorporate additional climate ready species
Table 9-3. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 3-3 in Napa's Promote goal. 46 PLAN
Vision
Proactive planning for the maintenance and care of trees is essential to maintaining a healthy urban forest. Through the utilization of tree inventory management software, data related to the urban forest can be properly managed through tracking and planning efforts. To maximize the benefit to the community, prioritized planting efforts in areas with the lowest canopy levels and highest heat exposure will ensure the benefits of trees are shared equitably across the community. Expanding tree care initiatives will require cost effective strategies and increased resources.
Description
One of the most significant outcomes that the City hopes to achieve through the adoption and implementation of this Plan is shifting from a reactive to proactive maintenance cycle. Accomplishing this will require that the City has a functional and effective urban forestry program, equipped with adequate staffing and resources, and is able to collaborate effectively with other City departments about important issues concerning the community's trees. Another primary theme of the Plan is managing existing tree and infrastructure conflicts (e.g. sidewalks) and preventing future conflicts from occurring. In Napa, 10.3% of tree sites were adjacent to damaged sidewalks; 2.2% were adjacent to damaged curbs: and 5.1% had both curb and sidewalk damage. By working together with other City departments and residents to proactively remove trees that are located in unsuitable planter strips and plant more appropriate trees for the sites available in the future, the City can reduce those numbers and minimize future issues. Finally, a third key objective of the Plan is to maintain the City's existing citywide canopy cover while equitably expanding canopy in areas with the greatest need. Through the efforts of this planning process, Napa now has data to create a robust planting plan, identify priority planting areas, and focus on new species to increase diversity across the City. As the community works towards accomplishing those three overarching goals and all other goals established in this Plan, they can utilize these recommendations and action items to quantitatively track and measure progress. Although this Plan represents one snapshot in time, it can and should be revisited and updated regularly to assess progress towards meeting the goals herein and adapt management approaches as needed. from collaboration.
Themes
• Tree and Infrastructure Conflicts • Need for Increased Funding, Staffing Capacity, • Water Resilience and Maintenance
• Tree Preservation vs. Removal and Replacement • Need for More Data Tracking Amidst Development Pressures • Need for Code and Policy Review and Enforcement • Targeted Tree Planting • Barriers to Maintaining Trees on Public Property 47 Develop a functional and sustainable urban forestry management program with adequate staffing, resources, and support from other City partners Action Depts, Involved Timeline Funding
Develop partnerships and increase collaboration between the Parks and Trees division, other City of Napa departments, local decisionmakers, & utilities PRS In progress $ • Expand interdepartmental communication, improve communication protocols, and increase cross-training between Parks, Public Works, Fire Department, and other relevant units to create PRS and 1-3 years $
safe and proactive management system with clear standards across departments Public Works PRS and
• Further integrate trees into Capital improvement Projects and across departments In progress Public Works
i. Apply the tree removal criteria and processes from the Tree Removal and Posting Policy to streamline internal infrastructure-related tree work PRS 1-3 years i. Clarify tree protection and removal/replacement roles (tree placement, species selection, TPZ, templates, etc.) PRS 1-3 years PRS and 1-3 years
i. Create a check box on CIP to confirm that Parks has reviewed the design Public Works
Align tree related goals with other citywide planning initiatives PRS and Planning 1-3 years $S PRS, PW $
• Formally adopt the view that trees are critical infrastructure; integrate this principle into plans, code, and infrastructure policy 1-3 years and Planning
• Integrate trees and urban forestry planning in the City's General Plan Parks chapter (4) to define them as park infrastructure and establish canopy cover goals for parks PRS and Planning 1-3 years PRS, PW and
i. Utilize trees to meet the General Plan's equity & public health goals by equitably planting trees in areas with the highest need and least canopy cover 4+ years $s Planning
i. Utilize the climate vulnerability analysis of the regional climate (eg, temperature and rainfall), physical factors (e.g., amount of impervious surfaces) and social factors (e.g., age and income PRS and Planning 1-3 years
to identify areas in the community where populations are most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change and wildfire risk • Integrate trees and urban forestry planning into the City's Climate Action Plan and align goals with the Urban Forestry Management Plan PRS and Planning 1-3 years $$ i. Utilize tree planting and preservation as a strategy to meet the City's carbon net zero by 2030 goal PRS In progress $ PRS and
• Coordinate urban forestry efforts with stormwater and watershed plans, including inventory goals and tree tracking in these areas Public Works 1-3 years i. Expand and preserve canopy cover in watershed areas and along the river buffer to promote canopy connectivity/wildlife corridors, erosion control, stormwater and flood mitigation, and PRS 4+ years $s
increase the amount of ecosystem benefits the community receives.
Table 10-1. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 4-1 in Napa's Plan goal. 48 Manage existing tree and infrastructure conflicts in Napa's urban forest and prevent future tree and infrastructure conflicts Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
PRS and
Proactively use the criteria set forth in the Tree Removal and Posting Policy to address tree and infrastructure conflicts Public Works In progress $$ PRS and
• Continue to engage in tabling events with neighborhoods to find creative ways to mitigate tree and hardscape conflicts and use the input to develop neighborhood-specific plans In progress $ Public Works
Implement alternative planting techniques such as structural soils, suspended pavements, and permeable pavements that reduce infrastructure conflicts and benefit the PRS and 1-3 years $$
tree Public Works
When planting new trees, select trees specifically for the space available, taking factors such as planter conditions (e.g. well size, existing infrastructure, exposure, soil type, climate), proximity to underground utilities and electrical transmission lines, soil volume availability, the quality of uncompacted soil available to the tree, and PRS $ species characteristics (e.g. size at maturity, growth habit, drought tolerance, rooting habits) into consideration • Maintain and improve tiered species lists matched to space constraints PRS $ PRS and
• Develop comprehensive planting plans to help minimize negative hardscape interactions while maintaining city-wide tree canopy cover Public Works $$ i. Trees should be selected specifically for the space available with characteristics favorable to an urban environment PRS $
PRS, PW
• Continue to consider minimum planter space for street trees and in development and redevelopment projects to avoid conflicts with hardscape and accessibility in the future and Planning
PRS and
i. Expand planting considerations to include soil volumes (as opposed to size of planting space); ensure increased soil volume is available in areas where large statured trees are desired $5s Public Works
Explore potential changes to development patterns and practices that better incorporate trees PRS and Planning $$ PRS and
• Consider removing some off-street parking to create bike and walking areas for active transportation including planter strip buffers $$$ Public Works
PRS and
• Consider removing the planter strip and planting trees behind the sidewalk (i.e., sidewalk would be adjacent to the curb and gutter) $$$ Public Works
Table 10-2. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 4-2 in Napa's Plan goal. 49 -
Plant, replace, and preserve trees at strategic levels and locations around the City to align with Napa's canopy goals, achieve an equitable distribution of tree canopy, and ensure consistent canopy coverage as older trees reach the end of their useful life Action Depts. Involved Timeline Funding
PRS, PW and $$$
Align new and replacement tree planting levels with the City's desired goal to maintain citywide canopy cover and meet the "no net loss" policy 4+ years Planning
• Utilize the data from the Canopy Assessment to set a canopy goal(s) based on current land cover distribution, land use classifications (such as zoning), community values, and vision PRS and Planning 4+ years $$ Focus new and replacement tree plantings and tree preservation efforts in high-priority areas that provide the greatest value and/or have the greatest need PRS 4+ years $$$ • Use the City's tree canopy and land cover analyses to develop planting plans that increase trees and canopy in areas that will allow for the greatest impact and return on investment PRS and 4+ years $$ Public Works
i. Use the priority planting analysis and Land Surface Temperature map to strategically plant and preserve trees in the hottest parts of the community (northern and western parts of PRS and 4+ years $5
the community) to help cool land surface and ambient temperatures and reduce heat islands Public Works i. Use the Canopy Change maps to identify Block Groups that are losing canopy cover and/or increasing in impervious surfaces and focus planting and preservation efforts in PRS and 4+ years $$
those areas Public Works
i. Utilize the climate vulnerability analysis to strive for a more balanced and equitable urban forest by targeting new tree plantings in areas identified as having lower than average PRS 4+ years $55
canopy cover and vulnerable populations to the impacts of climate change and wildfire risk i. Focus corresponding community outreach efforts and tree planting opportunities in areas with the least canopy cover and least access to greenspaces PRS 1-3 years $ i. Establish long-term targets for mitigating the impact of climate change PRS and Planning 4+ years $$ il. Identify areas where resilience con be increased or supported (eg. block groups with greater wildfire risk in the east and west edges, climate vulnerability in the north and central, and PRS and Planning 4+ years $$
social equity in the central and south parts of Napa)
Table 10-3. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 4-3 in Napa's Plan goal. 50 ACTION SPOTLIGHT:
Develop and implement standardized data tracking processes for the City's tree inventory, canopy, and Urban Forestry PLANNING FOR FUTURE Management Plan goals and action items
GENERATIONS
Action Depts, Involved Timeline Funding
Regularly update resources over time to see how the City is changing and if the program is on track to meet Napa has already established goals to reduce its PRS Inprogress
urban forestry goals greenhouse gas emissions and reduce climate pollutants • Maintain and update the inventory database to track all community trees, including their growth and condition, as from public and private operations within the City. Since PRS 4+ years sss
well as include new tree plantings, removals, and available planting sites in the built areas of the community trees sequester and store carbon, planting and preserving i. Consider helping managing partners in urban forest maintenance and planning by adding trees outside of the cities trees can be a valuable tool in the City's climate toolkit as PRS 4+ years
jurisdiction to TreeKeeper (e.g., Vine Trail, county natural areas) they work towards their goals. Potential strategies include • Continue to update the City's Canopy Assessment at regular intervals to track how canopy is changing across the city City Forest Credits for preserving existing tree canopy (City over time, monitor areas of canopy expansion and loss, and determine whether the community is on track to meet its PRS 4+ years sss Forest Credit, 2025), utilizing the carbon benefit values "no net loss" canopy goal quantified within Napa as a result of the Resource Analysis • Consider requiring mapping of during the development review process to locate trees and support tracking and PRS and and Land Cover Assessment, and tree planting incentives 4+ years
compliance efforts Planning for establishing new canopy, such as those described i. Explore how to calculate canopy cover on developable parcels and identify high-risk parcels for targeted protec- PRS and above in the "Promote" highlight. Aligning the goals of the 4+ years $s
tion Planning forestry program with Citywide climate goals and using tree • Utilize the Urban Forestry Management Plan and associated project deliverables in citywide and urban forestry planting and preservation as strategies to meet the City's PRS Inprogress
planning efforts. Continue to refer to and update them over time climate action goals set forth in the Climate Action Plan can help Napa to streamline its efforts, ensure consistency i. Include quantitative metrics and thresholds in UMP and policy materials PRS Inprogress $ across departments and programs, and maximize its
i. Consider the UFMP as a living document that continuously adapts to better serve the community as well as the urban impact to both the urban forest and climate.
PRS 4+ years ss
forest long into the future
i. Continue using the data provided in this plan as it relates to urban forest resiliency; update data based on routine PRS 4+ years $s
monitoring and observed trends
Table 10-4. Action and Implementation Plan for Recommendation 4-4 in Napa's Plan goal.
CITY OF NAPA
CLIMATE ACTION
& SUSTAINABILITY
COUNCIL PRIORITY
51 "We have an obligation to young people and future
generations to restore a'safe climate. Business-as-usual actions [..] need to be called out. Urban forests, like other land cover types and land uses, are critical in achieving net zero and net negative CO, emissions, and should be
managed accordingly.
- Community Suryey Respondent
MEASURING PROGRESS
Assessing these changes can help measure progress in
implementing the Plan's recommendations.
SECTION 4: The Napa Urban Forestry Management Plan is intended to be a living document that will continuously evolve. To serve as an Changes in Tree Benefits effective tool in fostering a sustainable and resilient urban forest in HOW ARE As discussed in Section 1, Napa's trees provide quantifiable Napa, both the ongoing implementation of the plan and the state of Napa's urban forest require regular monitoring and assessment. benefits to the community. Measuring Napa's progress in growing WE DOING? Periodic evaluations will help to pinpoint successes in the urban and caring for its urban forest can be done by examining changes in these tree benefits. Did the amount of air pollutants removed forestry plan that can be used in building momentum around trees increase or decrease over time? Does the canopy intercept more and also identify emerging opportunities and challenges that may necessitate incorporation into the Plan. This proactive approach gallons of stormwater? Has the amount of carbon stored ensures the plan's adaptability and relevance over time. increased? i-Tree, the USDA Forest Service's suite of tools that measures and quantifies the benefits of trees, can be used to Periodic Review and Updates of the Plan measure changes in tree benefits over time. The software tools in i-Tree are routinely updated based on the latest science and As a living document, the Plan is designed to be periodically research. (Note: To most accurately compare changes in benefits reviewed and updated every 3-5 years based on the changing over time, both the new and previous canopy assessment data needs of Napa's trees, community priorities, new opportunities, and must be analyzed through the same version of i-Tree.) successes in the Plan's implementation. The data and information from the other tools to measure progress, detailed below, are Indicators of a Sustainable Urban Forest essential for conducting the review and updating the Plan.
The Indicators of a Sustainable Urban Forest were used to Tree Inventory Updates establish a baseline assessment of Napa's urban forest broadly categorized into three groups: The Trees, The Players, and The A public tree inventory provides critical information to manage Management Approach. and maintain Napa's public tree resource and provides an opportunity to monitor the resource over time. Urban forestry As the Plan is implemented, periodic reassessments (every 3-5 industry standards recommend that municipal tree inventories years) of the Indicators of a Sustainable Urban Forest should be are updated on a regular basis, as planting, maintenance, and conducted. The reassessments can highlight successes in removals occur and fully re-inventoried at least once every 7-10 implementation, identify areas for improvement, and establish years. As Napa's public trees are inventoried and re-inventoried, new program priorities, recommendations, and action steps that the City can monitor changes in: can be used in Plan updates. • Tree genus and species composition
• Number and location of trees
• Size/age composition
• Condition
• Maintenance needs
53 CONCLUSION
The Urban Forestry Management Plan underscores the vital role • Identify gaps in existing tree planting, maintenance, and of trees in enhancing the quality of life, resilience, and preservation standards in the City's municipal code; sustainability of Napa. To maximize their benefits now and • Develop new standards and educational materials to address preserve them for the future, four main recommendations are issues affecting Napa's urban forest that are not included in provided to help guide Napa in achieving each of the Parks and current city code or policies; Recreation Department's identified goals to (1) Preserve, (2) • Strengthen and develop partnerships with residents, nonprofit Protect, (3) Promote, and (4) Plan for the City's trees and the future groups, organizations, private sector companies, developers, The summer shade of Napa's urban forest. For each goal, a vision statement and brief potential funders, and similar communities to share
description of current conditions and needs are provided, as well knowledge and resources and work together to promote that allows us to as 15 recommendations in total to help the City achieve Napa's trees;
their goals.
• Manage existing tree and infrastructure conflicts in Napa's walk, meet with our Overall, the Plan emphasizes the importance of proactive urban forest and prevent future tree and infrastructure conflicts; and neighbors, cool
management of public trees, and action by private landowners and residents to promote and maintain tree canopy. This is based • Plant, replace, and preserve trees at strategic levels and on major findings related to the percentage of land types, with locations around the City to align with Napa's canopy goals, ¿places for the kids to
76.4% of land in Napa being privately-owned, and the high achieve an equitable distribution of tree canopy, and ensure percentage - i.e. 91.7% - of community tree planting sites already consistent canopy coverage as older trees reach the end of play and make our full. Of similar importance, the Plan identified various benchmarks their useful life. to advise the City's current resource effort, finding that when Napa residents value and appreciate their urban trees particularly homes more evaluated by the number of public trees, Napa's $38.93 per-tree due to the benefits they provide including shade, reducing urban expenditure is less than the national, regional, and 50-99k heat islands, sequestering carbon, and providing habitat for comfortable." population group averages by a factor of 1.2-1.3x. wildlife. A partnership of City administration, residents, and businesses can stop tree canopy loss by stewarding trees in the Key recommendations to help address challenges and increase spaces where people live, work, and play. Residents and other - Community Survey planting opportunities include: private stakeholders can do their part by supporting local tree Respondent
efforts and by planting and preserving trees on private property. • Provide ongoing, proactive maintenance to trees throughout Together, the community can cultivate an abundant, healthy, all stages of their life cycles to maximize chance of successful sustainable, and resilient urban forest in Napa. establishment and optimize tree health, growth, and
community benefits;
• Preserve large, healthy, mature trees whenever possible to maximize and sustain community benefits;
54 APPENDICES City of Napa. n.d. Climate Action. Climate Emergency Resolution. Garvey, S. M., Templer, P. H., Pierce, E. A., Reinmann, A. B., and Retrieved from https://www.cityofnapa.org/1298/Climate-Action Hutyra, L. R. (2022). Diverging patterns at the forest edge: Soil respiration dynamics of fragmented forests in urban and rural City of Napa Community Tree Resource Analysis. 2024.
A. REFERENCES
City of Napa General Plan. Adopted 2022. Retrieved from https:// Giacinto, J. J., Fricker, G. A., Ritter, M., Yost, J., and Doremus, J. 2021. www.cityofnapa.org/259/General-Plan Urban forest biodiversity and cardiovascular disease: Potential health AECOM. 2013. Financing San Francisco's Urban Forest. San benefits from California's street trees. PLOS one, 16(11), e0254973.
Francisco, CA. https://default.sfplanning.org/plans-and-programs/ City of Napa Operating & Capital Budget Fiscal Years 2023/24 and planning-for-the-city/urban-forest-plan/UFP_Financing_Study_Exec_ 2024/25, 2023. Retrieved from https://www.cityofnapa.org/ Gilstad-Hayden, K., Wallace, L.R., Carroll-Scott, A., Meyer, S.R., Barbo, S., Sum_131216.pdf ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/217 Murphy-Dunning, C., and Ickovics, J.R. 2015. Research note: Greater tree canopy cover is associated with lower rates of both violent and property Akbari, H., D. Kurn, et al 1997. Peak power and cooling energy crime in New Haven, CT. Landscape and Urban Planning, 143, 248-253. ity of Napa Parks Infrastructure Program. 2023. Parks Conditio savings of shade trees. Energy and Buildings 25:139-148. ssessment and Program Recommendations. Retrieved fror https://www.cityofnapa.org/DocumentCenter/View/12033/Park- Hauer, R. J., Timilsina, N., Vogt, J., Fischer, B. C., Wirtz, Z., and American Forests. 2025. Tree Equity Score. Retrieved from https:// Infrastructure-Program-2023 Peterson, W. (2018). A volunteer and partnership baseline for www.treeequityscore.org/insights/place/napa-ca municipal forestry activity in the United States. Arboriculture and City of Napa Public Works Operations. 2020. Fiscal year 2019 • 2020 Urban Forestry (AUF), 44(2), 87-100.
American Planning Association. 2003. Planning the Urban Forest: Concrete Repairs. https://www.cityofnapa.org/DocumentCenter/ Ecology, Economy, and Community Development. 2009. American View/10015/Concrete-Work-2019-2020-PDF Hodges and Brandle 1996 https://reason.org/policy-study/26th- Planning Association. Edited by Schwab, James. annual-highway-report/maintenance-disbursements-per-mile/.
City of Napa Tree Canopy and Land Cover Assessment. 2024. Accessed June 21, 2024 Baudry, J., Bunce, R. G. H., and Burel, F. 2000. Hedgerows: an international perspective on their origin, function and management. Clark, J.R., Matheny, N.P., Cross, G., Wake, V. 1997. A Model of Urban Jennings, V.; Gaither, C.J. 2015. Approaching Environmental Health Journal of Environmental Management, 60(1), 7-22. Forest Sustainability. J Arbor 23(1):17-30. Disparities and Green Spaces: An Ecosystem Services Perspective.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 12, 1952-1968.
Browning, D. M. and Wiant, H. V. 1997. The Economic Impacts of Currie, J., Neidell, M., and Schmieder, J.F. 2009. Air pollution and Deferring Electric Utility Tree Maintenance. Arboriculture & Urban infant health: Lessons from New Jersey. Journal of Health Jones, B. A., and Goodkind, A. L. 2019. Urban afforestation and Forestry 3: 106-112; DOI: https://doi.org/10.48044/jauf.1997.017 Economics, 28(3), 688-703. infant health: Evidence from MillionTreesNYC. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 95, 26-44.
Bunge, A., Diemont, S., Bunge, J., Harris, S.. Urban foraging for food Dwyer, J.F, McPherson, E.G., Schroeder, H.W., and Rowntree, R.A. security and sovereignty: quantifying edible forest yield in Syracuse, 1992. Assessing the Benefits and Costs of the Urban Forest. Journal Karl, Tom, P. Harley, L. Emmons, B. Thornton, A. Guenther, C.
New York using four common fruit- and nut-producing street tree of Arboriculture 18(5): 227-234. Basu, A. Turnipseed, K. Jardine. Efficient Atmospheric Cleansing species, Journal of Urban Ecology, Volume 5, Issue 1, 2019, juy028, of Oxidized Organic Trace Gases by Vegetation. October 2010. https://doi.org/10.1093/jue/juy028 Ellison, D., Morris, C.E., Locatelli, B., Sheil, D., Cohen, J., Murdiyarso, https://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/330/6005/816 D., Gutierrez, V., Van Noordwijk, M., Creed, I.F., Pokorny, J. and Cascadia Consulting Group. 2001. Seattle Urban Forest Assessment: Gaveau, D., 2017. Trees, forests, and water: Cool insights for a hot Kenney, Alex W., van Wassenaer, P.J.E., and Satel, A.L., 2011. Criteria Sustainability Matrix. Appendix I, Matrix Summary Detail, p. I-8. world. Global Environmental Change, 43: 51-61. and Indicators for Strategic Urban Forest Planning and Management.
Arboriculture and Urban Forestry 2011. 37(3): 108-117
City Forest Credits. 2025. Carbon Credits for City Trees. Retrieved Fernández-Juricic, E. 2001. Avifaunal use of wooded streets in an from https://www.cityforestcredits.org/ urban landscape. Conservation Biology. 14(2): 513-521. 55 -
Kooch, Y., Tavakoli, M., and Akbarinia, M. (2018). Tree species Napa County Historical Society, 2025. Napa's First People. Retrieved Tiwary, A., Sinnett, D., Peachey, C., Chalabi, Z., Vardoulakis, S., Fletcher, could have substantial consequences on topsoil fauna: a from https://napahistory.org/napas-first-people/ T.,... and Hutchings, T. R. 2009. An integrated tool to assess the role feedback of land degradation/restoration. European Journal of of new planting in PM,, capture and the human health benefits: A Forest Research, 137(6), 793-805. Napa Sustainability Plan (2012)https://www.cityofnapa.org/486/ case study in London. Environmental pollution, 157(10), 2645-2653 Sustainability Operating & Capital Budget Fiscal Years 2020-2021 Kuo, F.E. and Sullivan, W.C., 2001. Environment and crime in the through 2024/25 Troy, Austin; Grove, J. Morgan; O'Neil-Dunne, Jarlath. 2012. The inner city: Does vegetation reduce crime? Environment and relationship between tree canopy and crime rates across an urban Behavior, 33(3), pp.343-367. Nowak, Richards, N.A. 1982/83. Diversity and Stability in a Street rural gradient in the greater Baltimore region. Landscape and Tree Population. Urban ecology. 7:159-171. Urban Planning. 106: 262-270.
Li, D., Chiang, Y. C., Sang, H., and Sullivan, W. C. 2019. Beyond the school grounds: Links between density of tree cover in school Ow, L.F., and Ghosh, S. 2017. Urban cities and road traffic noise: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Calculator. 2025. Retrieved from surroundings and high school academic performance. Urban Reduction through vegetation. Applied Acoustics, 120, 15-20. https://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm?pubDate=20251015 Forestry and Urban Greening, 38, 42-53.
Pena, JCdC, Martello, F., Ribeiro, M.C., Armitage, R.A., Young, RJ., Ulmer, J. M., Wolf, K. L., Backman, D. R., Tretheway, R. L., Blain, C. J., Li, D.; Sullivan, W.C. 2016. "Impact of views to school landscapes and Rodrigues, M. 2017. Street trees reduce the negative effects of O'Neil-Dunne, J. P., and Frank, L. D. 2016. Multiple health benefits of on recovery from stress and mental fatigue." Landscape and urbanization on birds. PLOS ONE 12(3): e0174484. urban tree canopy: The mounting evidence for a green prescription.
Urban Planning. 148:149-158. Health and Place, 42, 54-62.
Matsuoka, R. 2010. Student performance and high school landscapes: Desar aunt on it 2a1 iny Report Maintenance. Ulrich, R. S. 1984. View through a window may influence recovery Examining the links. Landscape and Urban Planning. 97. 273-282. from surgery. Science, 224(4647), 420-421.
Sherer, P.M., 2003. Why America Needs More City Parks and Open McDonald et al 2016. Planting Healthy Air: A global analysis of the role Space. San Francisco: The Trust for Public Land. Retrieved from http:// of urban trees in addressing particulate matter pollution and extreme www.tpl.org/content_documents/parks_for_people_Jan2004.pdf heat. The Nature Conservancy. Retrieved from https://thought- 41.25323 asiat serious tortel us a forest leadership-production.s3.amazonaws.com/2016/10/28/17/17/50/0615 Thériault, Marius; Kestens, Yan; and Des Rosiers, François, The 788b-Seaf-4b4f-a02a8819c68278ef/20160825_PHA_Report_FINAL.pdf Impact of Mature Trees -on House Values and on Residential Location Choices in Quebec City 2002. International Congress on Wolf, K. L. 2005. Business district streetscapes, trees, and consume McPherson, EG., Xiao, XI, Maco, S.E., Van Der Zanden, A., Simpson, Environmental Modelling and Software. 137. https:// response. Journal of Forestry, 103(8), 396-400.
J.R., Bell, N., Peper, P.J. 2002 Western Washington and Oregon scholarsarchive.byu.edu/iemssconference/2002/all/137 Community Tree Guide: Benefits, Costs and Strategic Planting. Wolf, K.L. 2007. City trees and property values. Arborist News.
Center for Urban Forest Research Pacific Southwest Research Thompson, E. Herian, M., Rosenbaum, D. 2021. The Economic Footprint 16(4):34-36.
Station. https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/ topics/urban_forestry/ and Quality-of-Life Benefits of Urban Forestry in the United States. products/5/CUFR_164_Western_WA_OR_Tree_Guide.pdf Prepared for the Arbor Day Foundation. Bureau of Business Research Xiao, Q., McPherson, E.G., Simpson, J.R., Ustin, S.L. 1998. Rainfall University of Nebraska. Retrieved from: https://www.arborday.org/ Interception by Sacramento's Urban Forest. Journal of McPherson, G. E. and lules Muchnick. 2021. Effects of Street urban-forestry-economic/downloads/complete-report-findings.pdf Arboriculture. 24(4): 235-244.
Tree Shade on Asphalt Concrete Pavement Performance. 2005. торе 20531030510.
Arboriculture and Urban Forestry (AUF) November 2005, 31 (6) 303-310. Threlfall, C.G., Nicholas S.G. Williams, Amy K. Hahs, Stephen J.
Livesley. Approaches to urban vegetation management and the Morgenroth, J., Nowak, D. J., and Koeser, A. K. (2020). DBH impacts on urban bird and bat assemblages, Landscape and Urban distributions in America's urban forests—an overview of structural Planning, Volume 153, 2016, Pages 28-39. diversity. Forests, 11(2), 135.
56 B. BUDGET BENCHING
Napa, CA United States Western Region 50,000-99,999 Population Napa Tree and Population Totals # % Funding Category 2021-2025 Avg. $ 2025 $ x Napa 2025 $ x Napa 2025$ × Napa Population (2024) 76,921 - Municipal Budget (Total Expenditures) $345,108,250 $276,645,140 0.8 $284,199,517 0.8 $191,759,181 0.6 Street Trees 23,895 70% Annual Tree Activity Budget $1,328,820 $7.75 0.8 $932,638 0.7 $892,846 0.7 Park Trees 10,241 30% Per Capita Forestry Budget (population 76,921) $17.28 $12.10 0.7 N/A N/A $12.98 0.8 Total Public Trees 34,136 100%
Table B2. Total annual forestry expenditures from the City of Napa (five-year averages from the City budget) compared with the United States, Western Region, and 50-99k Population Group averages, including funding levels and the ratio of the comparison value to Napa. (Source: Hauer and Peterson 2018, where 2016 values were updated Table B1. 2024 Population size and number of public trees in Napa, used to to 2025 values using the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Inflation Calculator) calculate per-capita and per-tree benchmarking values in Table 5 and Table B2.
C. ORDINANCE MATRIX
Topic Addressed (Yes/No) Chapter and Section Comments
Credentials
Requires certified arborist for paid private tree work
Requires certified arborist for paid public tree work N Nork must conform to standards established by the Department, though code does not specify it be done by
12.44.050
certified arborist
Requires licensing of private tree care firms N
Defines official authority for public tree management 12.44.020 The "Department" (defined as the Community Resources Department of the city) Table C1: Municipal Code Matrix
57 -
Topic Addressed (Yes/No) Chapter and Section Comments
Public Tree Management and Protection
Establishes/Authorizes City Forester to regulate public trees N - - Establishes/Authorizes City position (e.g. Mayor, City Administrator, DPW
12.44.030 The "Director" (defined as the Community Resources Department of the city) Director) to regulate public trees
Established a community Tree Board or Commission 2.72.010; 12.44.010 Tree Advisory Commission, 2.72.50 defines Commission duties Defines public trees Partially 12.44.010 Defines street tree and right-of-way Requires annual community tree work plans N
Identifies formula for determining monetary tree value 12.44.010 Formulas from Council of Tree and Landscape Appraisers are included in the definition of replacement value Establishes responsibility for public tree maintenance (e.g. City, adjacent 12.44.050 use termanene day erney res permis require or pung 1) he operments. property owner)
Requires regular public tree maintenance Partially 12.44.050 Requires property owners provide regular street tree maintenance Requires particular types of maintenance (e.g., pruning) Partially 12.44.050 For street trees (A) watering, weed control, removal of tree-well trash, reporting hazards, pruning (with a permit) Requires adherence to ANSI A300 standards and best management Partially 12.44.050 Pruning to follow specifications of best practices of professional arboriculture practices
Establishes permit system for work on public trees 12.44.030; 12.44.050 Permit required to plant a street tree, permit required to prune street trees (above and below ground) Requires payment of fees for the removal of public trees 12.44.030 Permit required to remove a street tree (ROW tree) Establishes provisions for penalties for non-compliance 12.44.060 Violation chargeable as a misdemeanor/injunctive relief Restricts tree removal on public property 12.44.040; 12.44.030 Applies to street trees and other trees on city property; city can remove "within a public right-of-way or where necessary for any engineering reason"
Permit or approval required for tree removal, pruning or excavating near Partially 12.44.040: 12.44.030 pral set resortes in lyle propery a are repaye. end nine one please public trees
Requires protection of public trees during construction, repairs or utility 12.44.040; 12.44.050 Construction; utility line pruning requires a permit
work
ohibits damage to public trees (e.g. attaching ropes, signs, wire 12.36.160; 12.36.180; Unlawful to climb, damage, vandalize or injure any tree on park property; Permit required to plant or injure a street tree emicals, storing materials, excavation etc 12.44.030; 12,44.040 (ROW tree); Injury / destruction of trees on city property is prohibited Table C1: Municipal Code Matrix
58 _' -
Topic Addressed (Yes/No) Chapter and Section Comments
Public Tree Management and Protection
Establishes provisions for trimming for overhead utility line clearance 12.44.050 City shall continue to coordinate efforts with utility companies around proper pruning practices around overhead utilities.
Restricts burning of solid wood waste Prohibits burning solid waste/compostables (would include tree material) except by burning inside buildings in stoves for
5.60.080 that purpose to the extent permitted under laws of the state Establishes a wood utilization program N -
Establishes an insect/disease control strategy Partially 12.44.050 Department maintenance may include "pest and disease management procedures" Prohibits tree topping 12.44.050 Exemptions require approval
8.24.010; 12.44.080; Definition; City may serve notice to any person in violation; notice and if action is not taken city can perform work and bill Regulates abatement of hazardous or nuisance trees on private property
12.45.120 property owner
Regulates removal of dead or diseased trees 8.24.010; 12.44.010; ore creater ero he a chen of any rogery as adely prey puli stances, ating ded
12.44.030; 12.44.050
Topic Addressed (Yes/No) Chapter and Section Comments
Tree Planting
Regulates tree species which may or may not be planted on N -
private property (approved tree list)
Requires tree planting around and within parking lots N Requires replacement of removed publicly owned trees Partially 12.44.030 Replanting when the Director deems it appropriate Permits public tree planting - beyond the right-of-way N 12,44,030 Planting in the ROW requires a permit Requires permit for ROW planting 12.44,030 Planting in the ROW requires a permit Peruines tree plantings around new developments ise ako tres in Partially 16.36.030 Slander rate appropule neto mur lydedures of an aproved ye shal be submited by the Regulates tree species which may or may not be planted on public
12.44,030 -
property (approved tree list)
Table C1: Municipal Code Matrix
59 - -
Topic Addressed (Yes/No) Chapter and Section Comments
Private Tree Protection and Preservation
Restricts tree removal on private property N -
12.45.060; Removal of significant trees requires council approval; restricts removal of seven (7) protected native tree species of a Permit or approval required for tree removal on private property Partially 12.45.080; certain size and on private property over one acre in size zoned for residential or agricultural purposes, or a property zoned
12.45.090 for commercial or industrial purposes (090 where there is or is not a pending discretionary development application) Requires preservation of trees during development on private property Partially see above
12.45.080;
Encourages preservation of trees during development on private property Partially Significant and protected trees
12.45.090
Prohibits damage to preserved/protected trees Partially 12.45.060; 12,45.080 Significant tree modification requires a permit (including injury); same for protected native trees Prohibits damage or removal of trees on another person's property Partially 15.36.150 These be curent an ed are esay for such any rest matin the money are wine rapery burs Inventory of trees on site required Partially 12.45.090 With permit application to remove protected trees, also submitted with discretionary development application Identification of forests/woodlands required N -
12.45.010; prete one resent a ser trice eate eyes ense and or let per over one.
Specific species and/or size tree regulated (e.g. heritage/significant trees)
12.45.030
"Significant Tree" designated for special properties
Location of Critical Root Zone/Dripline required 12.45.050 No work within 30 ft of dripline of significant trees Minimum canopy coverage requirement set N -
Identification of riparian buffers, natural areas, preservation zones N -
12.45.08C enter prose rainer pre real race changed or arous chemicals with the.
Tree protection/preservation plan required 2.25.09
Identification of prohibited activities in dripline/critical root zone 12.45.050 No work within 30 ft of dripline of significant trees Tree protection fencing required N -
ocation/type of other tree protection measures (e.g. root pruning eration, vertical mulching, trunk protection, soil protection, irrigation,) on For protection of significant trees, work within the dripline, grade changes, storing materials/equipment, and injury requires
12.45.050 permission from the Director
development plans (e.g. site plans, construction plans, etc.) Table C1: Municipal Code Matrix
60 -
Topic Addressed (Yes/No) Chapter and Section Comments
Private Tree Protection and Preservation
Provide credits/incentives for tree preservation - -
Landscape plan with proposed landscaping and mitigation trees Partially Mitigation planting upon removal of protected native trees during development, landscape plan not specified to be planted
Requires Grading plan to include protected/preserved trees N - Utility plan with trees to include protected/preserved trees N Tree planting requirements for removal of regulated trees Fee in Lieu of planting mitigation trees 12.45.100 When onsite mitigation planting upon removal of protected native trees during development is not feasible Tree mitigation survival requirements 12.45.100 3 year security for the maintenance of replacement trees upon significant tree removal, can be extended Fine for removal of regulated trees 12.45.140 Illegal removal of protected private trees results in penalties / fines Penalties established for damage and removal of preserved/saved trees 12.45,140 Monetary and civil penalties to violations of the chapter Bonding to ensure required trees are planted 12.45,070 3 year security for the maintenance of replacement trees upon significant tree removal Bonding utilized to discourage tree removals N - -
Bonding utilized to discourage tree removals N -
Establishes a formal review of site/tree plans Partially 12.45.090 for removal of protected native trees, development design reviewed by Tree Advisory Commission, permit may be granted if deemed appropriate
Regres the designate authority to perform site inspections. N -
12.45.140 protected private tree violations result in penalties. Fines are deposited into a revolving fund for replacing and planting trees Establishes or refers to a Tree Fund
and/or tree-related education projects
Table C1: Municipal Code Matrix
61 - -
Topic Addressed (Yes/No) Chapter and Section Comments
Other
12.44.030;
Appeal permitting decisions are first appealed by the Director to the Tree Advisory Commission, and then City Council
12.45.080; 12,45.090
Landscape plan with proposed landscaping and mitigation trees trees with a diameter of 8" or more measured above 24" above the existing grade shall be identified by type, circumference,
16.28.010
to be planted and dripline on the map; as well as trees proposed for removal; and protected tree locations Traffic Engineer with the authority to require the removal of trees growing on in a maintained parkway or on private Requires Grading plan to include protected/preserved trees 10.32.020; 12.44.010 property in the setback if it obstructs the view of any driveway or intersection or traffic.; hazard tree can be defined as "interferes with vehicular or pedestrian traffic"
Table C1: Municipal Code Matrix
-
D. SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS TABLES
he development of the Plan included an evaluation of industry:
efined sustainability indicators to assess current conditions in the urban forest resource, programming, and engagement (as defined The indicators are broken up into three by Clark et al 1997 and Kenney et al 2011). The sustainability categories including:
indicators can be used to understand what areas of the program • The Trees can be improved to meet industry recommendations. * The Players 3 The Management Approach
Napa's assessed level of performance and rationale for selecting that level for each category are included in the following tables.
THE TREES O The Trees performance indicators analyze how Napa is doing in relation to City-owned trees and urban tree canopy. Overall Napa is performing at a moderate level with one category ranked as high and one ranked as low.
Indicators of a Performance Levels
Suban Foreste Overall Objective or Industry Standard Low Moderate High Rating Notes Canopy is not on a nopy goal is achieved Moderate The City of Napa's Tree Canopy and Land Cover Assessment Candy decreasing ill on the war (2024), which mapped tree canopy throughout the city, trajectory to achieve the
No canopy goals have established goal. achievement. found that the average tree canopy cover was 21.5% as of been set 2022. The report found that Napa's tree canopy increased from increased from 18.1% (2012) to 21.5% (2022).
Equitable Tree planting and public Tree planting and public Tree planting and public Low Based on the Tree Equity Score by American Forests, 80% of Distribution outreach and education is outreach and education is outreach and education is block groups (48 of 64) have a high tree equity score (above (Location of benefits of tree canopy are available to all, especially for not determined by tree focused on neighborhoods focused in neighborhoods 75%). Greater tree canopy cover tends to be on the east and Canopy) those most affected by these benefits. canopy cover or benefits. with low tree canopy. with low tree canopy and a west edges of the city. Tree planting and public education high need for tree benefits. and outreach is not directly related to equitable distribution of tree canopy and benefits.
Age of Trees Establish a diverse-aged population of public trees across Age distribution is not There is GIS data regarding Age distribution is Moderate Napa has a nearly ideal age distribution. 52.3% of (Size and Ag the entire city and for each neighborhood. Ideal standard proportionately distributed land cover around the city, generally aligned with the - High inventoried trees are between 0-8 inches in diameter at Distribution 0-8" DSH: 40% across size classes at the including the location of ideal standard diameter standard height (DSH) and 6.3% are over 24 inches in DSH. 9-17" DSH: 30% city level. private tree canopy. There classes at the 18-24" DSH: 2096 is no private tree inventory. neighborhood level.
Over 24"DSH: 10%
63 _' -
Indicators of a Performance Levels
Sustainable
Urban Forest Overall Objective or Industry Standard Low Moderate High Rating Notes Condition of Possess a detailed understanding of tree condition No current information is Information from a partial or Information from a current, Moderate Data collection for the public tree inventory included condition Publicly Owned and potential risk of all intensively-managed, publicly- available on tree condition sample or inventory is used GIS-based, 100% complete - High 93-motes ce eas or eter orientes, Curenty.
Trees (trees owned trees. This information is used to direct or risk. to assess tree condition and public tree inventory is used managed maintenance actions. risk. to indicate tree condition intensively, and risk.
Condition of Possess a detailed understanding of the ecological No current information is Publicly-owned natural Information from a current, High Publicy-Owned structure and function of all publicly-owned natural available on tree condition areas are identified in a GIS-based, 100% complete Natural Areas areas (such as woodlands, ravines, stream corridors, or risk. sample-based "natural areas natural areas survey is utilized (trees managed etc.), as well as usage patterns. survey" or similar data. to document ecological intensively) structure and function, as better condition. well as usage patterns.
Trees on Private Possess a solid understanding of the extent, location and No data is available on Current tree canopy Detailed information Moderate There is GiS data regarding land cover around the Property general condition of trees on private lands. private trees. assessment reflects basic available on private trees. city, including private tree canopy but private trees information (location) of Ex. bottom-up sample- are not inventoried. both public and private based assessment of trees.
canopy combined.
Diversity Establish a genetically diverse population of publicly-owned Fewer than five species No species represents more No species represents more Moderate The community tree inventory has two species that exceed trees across the entire city and for each neighborhood. dominate the entire tree than 20% of the entire tree than 10% of the entire tree the 10% rule: Crape myrtle / Lagerstroemia spp. (18.5%) and Tree populations should be composed of no more than population citywide. population citywide. population citywide. coast live oak / Quercus agrifolia (10.7%). 30% of any family, 20% of any genus, or 10% of any species.
Sustainability Establish a tree population suited to the urban No current information is 50% to 75% of trees are lore than 75% of trees a Moderate The Resource Analysis (2024) included a relative performance environment and adapted to the overall region. Suitable available on suitability. considered suitable for onsidered suitable f index which suggests that many species are performing well and species are gauged by exposure to imminent threats, -or- the site. the site. are suitable for the environment. In the past, many trees were considering the "Right Tree for the Right Place" concept Less than 50% of trees planted in sites that were not large enough for their mature and invasive species. are considered suitable stature, and therefore not suitable for their particular location. for the site.
Soil Volume Establish minimum street tree soil volume requirements Minimum street tree soil Minimum street tree soil Minimum street tree soil Low- Current practices are to plant trees based on size of the tree to ensure there is adequate space and soil for street volumes have not been volume has been volumes have been Moderate and minimum grow space available (Napa Master Street Tree trees to thrive. Minimum soil volumes by mature size: established. established based on established and are required List). Although soil volumes have not been calculated, this 1000 cubic feet for large trees; 600 cubic feet for medium mature size of tree. to be adhered to for all new process allows managers to select a tree for a particular site trees; 300 cubic feet for small trees. street tree planting projects. based on soil availability.
Table D1. Assessed Level and Rationale for The Trees Indicators. 64 THE PLAYERS O The Players performance indicators analyze how Napa is doing in relation to stakeholders, community members and department cooperation. Overall, Napa is performing at a low-moderate level. Napa is performing at a high level in one category.
Performance Levels
Overall Objective or Industry Standard Low Moderate High Rating Notes Residents understand, cooperate, and participate in urban Little or no resident Some active groups are The majority of all Moderate There is a lack of unification. Typically, local groups are Neitherhood forest management at the neighborhood level. Urbar involvement or engaged in advancing neighborhoods are advocating through a climate lens which indirectly involves forestry is a neighborhood-scale issue. neighborhood action. urban forestry activity, but organized, connected, and trees and canopy. with no unified set of goals working towards a unified
or priorities. set of goals and priorities.
Large Private and Large, private, and institutional landholders embrace Large private land holders Education materials and Clear and concise goals are Low- Institutional citywide goals and objectives through targeted resource are unaware of issues and advice is available to large established for large private Moderate Landholder management plans. potential influence in the private landholders. Few land holders through direct under a management plan.
Involvement urban forest. No large large private landholders or education and assistance private land management institutions have programs. Key landholders plans are currently in place. management plans in place. and institutions have management plans in place.
Green Industry The green industry works together to advance citywide Little or no involvement Some partnerships are in Long-term committed There is little City involvement with green industry, and thi urban forest goals and objectives. The city and its partners Moderate Involvement from green industry leaders place to advance local urban partnerships are working focus is on short-term goals capitalize on local green industry expertise and innovation. to advance local urban forestry goals, but more to advance local urban forestry goals. often for the short-term. forestry goals.
City Department All city departments and agencies cooperate to advance Conflicting goals and/or Informal teams among Common goals and Low- There is some cohesion amongst departments across the and Agency citywide urban forestry goals and objectives. actions among city departments and agencies collaboration occur across Moderate City, although goals are not always aligned.
Cooperation departments and agencies. are communicating and all departments and implementing common goals agencies. City policy and
on a project-specific basis. actions are implemented by formal interdepartmental
and interagency working
teams on all city projects.
Funder Local funders are engaged and invested in urban forestry Little or no funders Funders are engaged in Multiple funders are fully Low inding for the Forestry Program comes from the Gene Engagement initiatives. Funding is adequate to implement citywide are engaged in urban urban forestry initiatives at engaged and active in and and not from the private sect urban forest management plan forestry initiatives. minimal levels for short- urban forestry initiatives for term projects. short-term projects and
long-term goals.
Utility All utilities are aware of and vested in the urban forest Utilities and city agencies Utilities and city agencies Utilities, city agencies, and Moderate City Code includes regulations that protect public trees, and Engagement and cooperates to advance citywide urban forest goals act independently of urban have engaged in dialogues other stakeholders integrate they apply to collaborating agencies and managing partners. and objectives. forestry efforts. No about urban forestry efforts and collaborate on all urban oly reinst not let flowed and the enforcement
coordination exists. with respect to capital forestry efforts, including improvement and planning, site work, and
infrastructure projects. outreach/education.
65 _' -
Indicators of a Performance Levels
Sustainable
Urban Forest Overall Objective or Industry Standard Low Moderate High Rating Notes State State departments/agencies are aware of and vested in State departments/ State departments/agencies State departments /agencies, High There is a high level of engagement though state grant Engagement the urban forest and cooperates to advance citywide agencies and City agencies and City agencies have City agencies, and other funding to support urban canopy growth and development. urban forest goals and objectives. act independently of urban engaged in dialogues about stakeholders integrate and forestry efforts. No urban forestry efforts with collaborate on all urban coordination exists. respect to capital forestry efforts, including improvement and planning, site work, and
infrastructure projects. outreach/education.
Public The general public understands the benefits of trees and Trees are generally seen as Trees are generally Trees are seen as valuable Moderate The majority of the public values trees and sees them Awareness advocates for the role and importance of the urban forest. a nuisance, and thus, a recognized as important infrastructure and vital to as beneficial. drain on city budgets and and beneficial. the community's well-being. personal paychecks. The urban forest is
recognized for the unique
environmental, economic,
and social services its
provides to the community.
Regional Neighboring communities and regional groups are Little or no interaction Neighboring communities Regional urban forestry Moderate Napa Resource Conservation District is an active regiona Collaboration actively cooperating and interacting to advance the between neighboring and regional groups share planning, coordination, and collaborator. There is funding for invasive species region's stake in the city's urban forest. communities and similar goals and policy management is widespread. management and they are looking into avenues to increase regional groups. vehicles related to trees and urban forestry funding in other ways. the urban forest.
Table D2. Assessed Level and Rationale for The Players Indicators.
The Management performance indicators analyze how Napa is doing in relation to the City's management of the urban forest. Overall.
THE MANAGEMENT APPROACH O Napa is performing at a moderate-high level. Napa is performing at a high level in several categories. Overall, the City is ranked the highest in The Management category.
Indicators of a Performance Levels
Sustainable
Urban Forest Overall Objective or Industry Standard Low Moderate High Rating Notes Tree Inventory Comprehensive, GIS-based, current inventory of all No inventory or out-of-date rtial or sample-bas Complete, GIS-based High A complete, up-to-date GIS based inventory of publicly owned intensively-managed public trees to guide management, inventory of publicly-owned ventory of publicly-own inventory of publicly-owned trees was completed in 2023. The inventory is regularly with mechanisms in place to keep data current and trees. trees, inconsistently trees, updated on a regular, updated in an asset management system. available for use. Data allows for analysis of age updated. systematic basis. distribution, condition, risk, diversity, and suitability.
Canopy Accurate, high-resolution, and recent assessment of No tree canopy High-resolution tree canopy Moderate "he most up to date satellite imagery of Napa was analyzed ar Assessment existing and potential city-wide tree canopy cover that is assessment. assessment using aerial ported on in the City of Napa's Tree Canopy and Land Cove regularly updated and available for use across various 10 years old) high resolutior photographs or satellite Assessment (2024). departments, agencies, and/or disciplines. anopy assessment imagery. 66 -
Indicators of a Performance Levels
Sustainable
Urban Forest Overall Objective or Industry Standard Low Moderate High Rating Notes Management Existence and buy-in of a comprehensive urban forest No urban forest A plan for the publicly- A comprehensive plan for High Through this plan, Napa is focused on the long-term success Plan management plan to achieve city-wide goals. Re- management plan exists. owned forest resource the publicly owned forest of the urban forest, Napa is addressing today's concerns and evaluation is conducted every 5 to 10 years. exists but is limited in scope, resource exists and is establishing a community focused urban forestry program acceptance, and accepted and implemented. that can adapt as priorities change and goals are achieved. implementation.
Risk All publicly-owned trees are managed for maximum Request-based, reactive Some partnerships are in There is a complete tree Moderate The City reacts quickly to service requests around risk Management public safety by way of maintaining a city-wide inventory, system. The condition place to advance local urban inventory with risk management and has an understanding of the priority Program conducting proactive annual inspections, and eliminating of publicly-owned trees forestry goals, but more assessment data and a risk maintenance needs of the public tree inventory. hazards within a set timeframe based on risk level. Risk is unknown. often for the short-term. abatement program in management program is outlined in the management plan. effect. Hazards are eliminated within a set time
period depending on the
level of risk.
Maintenance All intensively-managed, publicly-owned trees are well Request-based, All publicly-owned trees are Common goals and Moderate There is some cohesion amongst departments across the City, Program of maintained for optimal health and condition in order to reactive system. No systematically maintained, collaboration occur across all - High although goals are not always aligned.
Publicly Owned extend longevity and maximize benefits. A reasonable systematic pruning program but pruning cycle is departments and agencies.
Trees cyclical pruning program is in place, generally targeting 5 is in place for publicly- inadequate. City policy and actions are (trees managed to 7 year cycles. The maintenance program is outlined in owned trees, implemented by formal intensively) the management plan. interdepartmental and interagency working teams
on all city projects.
Maintenance The ecological structure and function of all publicly-owned No natural areas Only reactive management Management plans are in Moderate Tree canopy data is available for publicly-owned natural areas.
Program of natural areas are protected and enhanced while management plans are efforts to facilitate public place for each publicly- - High Trees in natural areas are managed for risk, and ecological Publicy-Owned accommodating public use where appropriate. in effect. use (risk abatement). owned natural area focused function, and public use.
Natural Areas on managing ecological
(trees managed structure and function and
intensively) facilitating public use.
Planting Program Comprehensive and effective tree planting and Tree establishment is Tree establishment is Tree establishment is Moderate Funding is consistent for tree planting. Tree planting occurs on establishment program is driven by canopy cover goals, ad hoc. consistently funded and directed by needs derived an annual basis and is primarily focused on replacing trees that equity considerations, and other priorities according to occurs on an annual basis. from a tree inventory and were previously removed. the plan. Tree planting and establishment is outlined in other community plans and the management plan. is sufficient in meeting
canopy cover objectives.
Tree Protection Comprehensive and regularly updated tree protection No tree protection policy. Policies are in place to Protections policies ensure Moderate Policies are in place to protect trees near construction projects Policy ordinance with enforcement ability is based on protect trees, but the the safety of trees on public - High and protected trees. Private tree protections apply to properties community goals. The benefits derived from trees on policies are not well- and private land. The larger than 1 acre in size. public and private property are ensured by the enforced or ineffective. policies are enforced and enforcement of existing policies. supported by significant deterrents and shared
ownership of city goals.
67 -
Indicators of a Performance Levels
Sustainable
Urban Forest Overall Objective or Industry Standard Low Moderate High Rating Notes City Staffing and Adequate staff and access to the equipment and vehicles Insufficient staffing levels, Certified arborists and Multi-disciplinary team Moderate The current urban forestry workload exceeds in-house staff Equipment to implement the management plan. A high level urban insufficiently-trained staff, professional urban within the urban forestry and contractor capacities. Staff are certified arborists and forester or planning professional, strong operations and/or inadequate foresters on staff have unit, including an urban professional urban foresters are on staff. Equipment is staff, and solid certified arborist technicians. equipment and vehicle some professional forestry professional, adequate, well maintained, and is included in a replacement availability. development, but are operations manager, and program. lacking adequate staff levels arborist technicians.
or adequate equipment. Vehicles and equipment are
sufficient to complete
required work.
Funding Appropriate funding in place to fully implement both Funding comes from the Funding levels (public and Dynamic, active funding Low- Funding for the urban forestry program is consistent, but proactive and reactive needs based on a comprehensive public sector only, and private) generally cover from engaged private Moderate primarily supports reactive work. The City has acquired grant urban forest management plan. covers only reactive work. mostly reactive work. Low partners and adequate funding to supplement other public sources of funding. levels of risk management public funding are used to
and planting in place. proactively manage and
expand the urban forest.
Disaster A disaster management plan is in place related to the No disaster response plan A disaster plan is in place, A robust disaster Moderate There is a disaster plan in place, but Napa does not have a Preparedness city's urban forest. The plan includes staff roles, is in place. but pieces are missing and/ management plan is in debris management plan for large scale events. and Response contracts, response priorities, debris management and a or staff are not regular! place, regularly updated crisis communication plan. Staff are regularly trained rained or updater and staff is fully trained on and/or updated. roles and processes.
Resilience The City understands the climate and pest/disease The vulnerability The City understands Urban forest management Moderate Napa is gaining a better understanding of the vulnerabilities vulnerability of its trees and community. Management of the urban forest to climate and/or pest/disease decisions are designed to surrounding their urban forest and has baseline data for decisions are informed by strategies to improve urban future climate and pest/ vulnerability, but this does improve the resilience of monitoring and planning purposes. forest resilience and mitigate the harmful effects of disease threats has not not influence management both the urban forest and climate change. been studied. decisions. people. For example, there are credit or incentive
rograms in place for tree
r GHG benefits of trees a
tracked, or there is a wood
utilization program in place.
Communication | Effective avenues of two-way communication exist No avenues are in place. Avenues are in place, but Avenues are in place for High Sound avenues of communication are in place for urban among city departments and between the city and its City departments and public used sporadically and two-way communication, forestry management, visioning, and interdepartmental residents. Messaging is consistent and coordinated, determine on an ad-hoc without coordination or are well-used with targeted, engagement. when feasible. basis the best messages and only on a one-way basis. coordinated messages. avenues to communicate.
Table D3. Assessed Level and Rationale for The Management Indicators. 68 E. COMMUNITY SURVEY RESPONSES The community places a high value on trees on private and public properties. A significant majority of respondents (82%) strongly agree that trees on private property and public property (77%) are important to them (Figures E2 and E3).
Growing Trees on Private Property Is Important to Me
The full responses to the community survey are included below. 90% 82%
Currently, canopy cover in Napa is 21.5%. When asked about the 80% amount of trees, the majority of the 147 respondents (65.3%) 70%
greed that the City of Napa has too few trees while a third (339 60% pleased with the current level of canopy cover (Figure E1 50%
40%
Napa Has 30%
20%
70%
65% 10%
0%
Strongly agree
60%
Figure E2. The trees growing on my private property in Napa are important to me. 50%
40% Trees Growing in PROW Are Important to Me
% of Respondents 33% 90%
80% 77%
30%
70%
60%
20%
50%
% of Respondents
40%
10% 30%
20%
13%
2% 10% 5%
1% 1% 3%
0%
0%
The right Too many Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Does not apply; I do amount of trees trees disagree not live or work in Napa Figure E1. In your opinion, Napa has: Figure E3. The trees growing in the public right-of-way in front of my house (or business) are important to me. 69 Alongside their numerous benefits, trees can present challenges. The survey recorded the top three concerns of each respondent. Infrastructure conflicts (26.7%), nuisance pests (22.7%), and litter (12.1%) presented the highest level of concern (Figure E4).
Consequences of Trees
30% 27%
25%
20%
% of Respondents 15% 12% 23%
10% 9%
5% 2%
1%
0%
Block sunlight/ Litter (leaves, Infrastructure Allergens Nuisance pests Tree/limb failure shade lawn/ seeds, sap, conflicts (damage (aphids, etc.) (during storms, garden fruit, etc.) to sidewalks/ possible damage
foundations) to property, etc.)
Figure E4. What consequences of trees do you dislike? Please select your top 3 choices:
Incorporating private property into planting plans is essential to meet canopy goals, as it Despite a general willingness to plant trees and a shared appreciation for them, various barriers supplements limited public space. Survey results show that 40% of residents are willing to plant prevent people from taking action. A lack of information on tree care and tree selection was cited and care for trees, 29% are unwilling, and 26% face limitations like lack of space or ownership by 30% of respondents as an obstacle. Additionally, financial concerns were stated as a concern (Figure E5). for 17.5% of respondents) (Figure E6).
Willingness to Plant Trees Barriers to Planting
45% 40%
40% 36%
40% 35%
35% 30%
30% 27% 25%
25%
% of Respondents 20% 17% 17%
% of Respondents 20% 13% 14%
16% 15%
15%
9% 10%
10% 6%
5% 2% 5% 2%
09 0%
1am willing to lam willing to I already have (alease specks) Information Information on Information or nance matese please specia plant and care plant trees but enough trees I don't owr on tree proper tree the benefits o resources in planting for trees don't have the property in selection care tree planting additional trees space Napa on my property
Figure E5. Describe your willingness to plant trees on your private property in Napa. Figure E6. What are barriers to planting additional trees on your property? Check all that apply. 70 Survey results showed a divide in satisfaction, with 49% of respondents satisfied with the current level of tree care (Figure E7). Respondents valued tree pruning, tree planting, and the sidewalk replacement program (Figure E8).
Level of Satisfaction Important Services
49%
50% 35%
44% 30%
30% 26%
40% 25% 23%
30% 15%
10%
1096) 8%
20% 5%
5%
0%
10% 7% Tree planting Tree watering stump removal Treepruning(i.e Neighborhood Other inning canopy, sidewalk repa (please specify)
removing program
0% deadwood/
Very satisfied Satisfied Not satisfied broken limbs)
Figure E7. Describe your level of satisfaction with the current level of care that the City of Napa provides for street trees. Figure EB. What do you believe are the most important services provided by the Parks and Urban Forestry Division? Educational materials can unite residents in support of the urban forest and foster inclusivity. The top three topics respondents wanted to learn more about were species selection (21%), city regulations (%17), and general maintenance (16%) (Figure E9).
Topics to Learn More About
25%
21%
20%
16% 17%
15% 14%
13%
11%
10%
6%
5%
2%
096
Species selection Tree planting Benefits of trees Other Young puntes regulation tapa
(please specify)
Figure E9. What urban forestry related topics would you be most interested in learning more about (choose all that apply)? The majority of respondents live in the city of Napa (87%) (Figure E10). Council District 2 saw the greatest participation (29%) followed by Council District 4(25%), but all Districts saw some level of participation (Figure E11).
Do You Live in Napa? What Council District?
90% 87% 35%
80% 30% 29%
70% 25%
60% 25%
21%
50% 20% 18%
% of Respondents 40%
15%
30%
10% 7%
20%
11%
10% 5%
2%
0% 0%
None of the above Yes, I live in the city of Napa No, but I live within the county None of the above Council District 1 Council District 2 Council District 3 Council District 4 Figure E10. Do you live within the Napa city boundaries? Figure E11. What Council District do you live in? (see map in the above question) Supplemental Survey Responses
Other (Specified) Other (Specified) Other (Specified)
Dead tree removal and replacement. Raising sidewalks vs. taking out trees. Los Altos and Palo Alto have done a great Providing root zone volume and drainage for big tree species planting job implementing this.
Tree health evaluation Replacement of aging trees with native species Education
Preserve trees from being rashly cut down. Develop pollinator (wild garden) habitats in and around public spaces Maintaining parks
Getting work that needs to be done, done. That includes sidewalk repair. overcoming barriers to planting native street trees (e.g., modifications to Identifying and protecting heritage trees/species. sidewalks, etc. that can accommodate roots of native trees) Remove and replacement of hazardous trees or trees that disrupt sidewalks Make a plan to maintain and enhance the urban forest as a near term net Tree replacement to avoid more damage
carbon sink, consistent with Napa's Climate Emergency Resolution, and the Planting native and drought resistant species
Vegetation maintenance along public ROW (not just trees) newly-adopted General Plan - policy CCS 1-1 Implement immediate and working with residents to plant proper trees in the sidewalk strips sustained actions in support of achieving net zero climate pollutants from public Adding native pollinator habitat
and private operations within the City by 2030.
keeping parks clean and safe
specifying trees that include CA native trees of varying sizes I'm not familiar enough with these services to rate 3rd choice Care for existing trees including pruning that promotes healthy growth, and NOT Planting the correct tree in the correct place - hot weather appropriate, excessive or harmful pruning. Maintenance of public urban forest and parks powerline friendly
Public resource They do not remove dead limbs or street trees! We have been told its our Keeping parks free of off leash dogs! responsibility
Preventative Care to avoid sidewalk or street damage Tree maintenance of trees on public property controlling the invasive Chinese Tree of Heaven choking out native species choosing the rent tree for the location Right plant, right place Table E1. What do you believe are the most important services provided by the Parks and Urban Forestry Division? Other, please specify:
72 - -
Valued Services Other (Specified)
Lack of proper tree maintenance.
25%
Nothing else, but form requires checking 3 boxes.
23% nuisance tree species
non-native trees planted in sidewalk strips
benefits far outweigh concerns
20% Just sap/sticking residue
Trees that are over trimmed and look lopsided
18%
17%
Planting wrong type of trees in wrong places
Non native species are over represented
only damage to sidewalks. Survey demanded 3 things
15%
Damaging infrastructure: storm drain and hydrant
None
12%
% of Respondents
11% None.
invasive species
10%
9% benefits outweigh the effects of trees
None of the above
Can't think of any
I don't dislike trees
5% I don't have a third choice
4% 4%
prevalence of non-native trees
None
1% 1% 1% 1% I don't dislike any of the above
Only tree litter really bothers me.
0%
Benefits highly outweigh detriments.
Screening Support Wildlife Aesthetics Shade Reduce Promote Improve Mitigate Reduce Preserve Reduce mental habitat noise tourism/ air climate flooding views crime and pollution retail quality change and
physical (eg. storm-
health capture water
carbon) runoff
Figure E12. What tree benefits/services do you value? Please select your top 3 choices: Table E2. What consequences of trees do you dislike? Please specify. 73 _'
Having a Large Tree Other (Specified)
It is a gift of nature that we need to care and maintain. 50%
Provides significant wildlife habitat and blocks light pollution 45% I like seeing large native trees in Napa
45% provides needed shade for me and habitat for interesting birds and animals cost of tree trimming
40% would be great if the city takes better care of them Has consequences for neighbors that they cannot manage. awesome free shade and ads beauty and habitat for biodiversity 35%
provide shade/reduce city temps and improve views
Is a hazard and costly
30% Is a joy. We look forward to our trees growing taller 28%
Increased my property value
25% - but could be a fire hazard and can definitely be a safety hazard if buckle the sidewalk and/or roadway Are very expensive to maintain and prune
Is a great part of living in Napa
20%
deciduous trees supply summer shade and winter sun
The shade saves us from excessive heat in summer.
15% Is patt
13%
Is a responsibility
10% - Provides shade
WISH I HAD MORE/BETTER TREES IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD
4% some large redwoods in our neighborhood pose a threat to those homes, which i am concerned about 5% 4%
3%
sone at plain and rely ecose capta renes bring beauty healing or humans),. 1%
Adds character to a place and maximizes carbon capture
0%
is important to keep
Is a burden Is a privilege Is a part of Is frightening I don't have any Does not apply, Other living in Napa to me large trees I do not live (please specify) My neighbors have large oaks. I planted trees that are now large. So many naked, heat island backyards. where | live in Napa
Figure E13. Having a large tree(s) where I live in Napa... (select all that apply) Table E3. Having a large tree(s) where I live in Napa... (select all that apply) Other (Specified) Criteria
Locaton and now nealtny is the tree. 20%
Health, appropriate tree planted in appropriate location, ability to maintain health of tree itself 18%
Shade- more residents are walking to school and work. Plus, tourists like to walk ride bikes in 17% 17% 17% Napa. 16%
Infrastructure 16%
15%
If it's damaging property or sidewalks, it should be removed and a suitable replacement tree should be planted. 14%
14%
Invasive species like Glossy Privet trees need to be removed.
Age and health of the tree
tree risk management 12%
Is part of our beauty and quality of life here
The summer shade that allows us to walk, meet with our neighbors, cool places for the kids to % of Respondents 10% play and make our homes more comfortable.
history
Maturity - mature trees sequester more carbon 8%
loveliness.
Shading of sidewalks, bikeways, and grey infrastructure; Using a standardized risk 6%6 assessment methodology
Educational opportunities.
4%
Table E4. What criteria do you think should be considered when defining if a tree should be 3% preserved? (Other, please specify)
2%
Other (Specified)
I live just outside the city limits
0%
I have planted over 100 trees.
Species Environmental Socioeconomic Resilience for Wildlife habitat Location (l.e., Other benefits benefits of the community value (i.e., bus stop (please specifv) I planted 12 in last 4 years!
(improvements tree canopy and quality of foraging, pedestrian Replace with better to air quality, (improvements life in the face of nesting, canopy route, stormwater to human health, climate change connectivity) increasing More trees please management, property values, canopy in an carbon reduction, retail, privacy, etc.) area with
removing/ replacing fruit trees energy savings, etc.) lower than average cover)
Already planted as many as could fit! Have 8!
Table E5. Describe your willingness to plant trees on your private property in Napa. (Other, please specify) Figure E14. What criteria do you think should be considered when defining if a tree should be preserved? Choose all that apply. 75 - -
Other (Specified) Other (Specified) Other (Specified)
Irent Small lot. I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT TREES TO DO IT ON MY OWN have no room Time and cost for clean up can't plant with infrastructure there Only one spot left but maybe too close to driveway (have 8 trees already) The ones I have have over grown so much and crowded each other, I've had We are planning on planting when the weather cools in the fall. no space, i have many trees already to take some down.
I live in an HOA and planting is not allowed. HOA restrictions Space for the tree to grow.
I would only plant CA natives Space
Watering and maintenance.
ater - being in a water deficit district and in a fire area, we need to Condo Not enough space reful where we plant tre
Getting adequate water to curb strip; choosing appropriate tree Space Waiting for the right time.
PG&E will butcher them claiming right-of-way for wires I've planted out my property.
Tree selection on the approved list is not appealing
My lot has all the trees it can fit
Small space. Pge and water companies are in the way. Not enough space and sunlight.
I'm a renter I rent but also have a large redwood in the small back yard i have I lack space for additional trees Running out of space for more trees help on location to plant trees (landscaping) There are no barriers to planting additional trees on my property have 4 in front and 5 in back yard We have enough trees, redwoods and oaks. Our backyard is quite shady.
Renter None
Needs to be part of overall landscape and maintenance plan Available space Available space, species of existing trees (walnuts) We have enough shade trees currently. lack of space I have no more vacant dirt!
I would like to plant more trees, thinking of tearing out more cement first. I rent Property is too small for additional trees. buy an alse overpres house ron propery ever have a chance to Space space - I have planted many trees on my property already No more room!
l am a renter
Lack of space (already have 7 trees on 0.14 acre lot with 1200 sq ft home Space
Space, fire risk
I am a renter
none
none
space. I have a very small yard No barriers
Table E6. What are barriers to planting additional trees on your property? Other, please specify 76 _' -
Other (Specified) Other (Specified) Maintenance
I tried to report my neighbors massive removal of oak trees on their property lore planting of new trees so that as trees age and die they havi but no one could help me. Just said not all trees are protected. Not clear who replacements growin, 45% to call.
Evaluate trees that are dead or dying and remove or care for them.
Our arborist gets the permits 41%
Remove trees causing sidewalk disruption and replace with trees that don't I didn't know you need a permit 40%
replacing non-native street trees with native species
Our boulevard tree has a lot of dead branches and needs trimming buy I didn't want to pay the $200 deposit. planting more trees, especially tall trees I have not pulled a permit Tree maintenance and care 35% Table E7. If you have pulled a permit for tree work, how did you feel about the intenance and replacement of trees with more appropriate trees process? (Other, please specify) operty damage is occurit Browns alley Road could use more trees and a green center divide in some spots. 30% idewalk repair and reconfiguration to accommodate root growth fo Permit for Tree Work stablished specie
100%
Replacement before problems get worse or costs increase due to add damages 25% 24%
90% 89% Fix sidewalks not trees
keep the trees, fix the side walks. Respondi 21%
80%
Removal of dead or dying trees 20%
70%
Removal and control of invasive species
60% question/choice of answers not clear
15% 14%
Pruning to develop good structure
50%
% of Respondents plant more trees
40% fix the sidewalk while planning for the tree's future growth 10% 30% Establish more street trees, especially in lower income neighborhoods Work around existing mature trees on private property and along roadsides 20% to avoid cutting them down 5%
additional care to allow trees to grow to their full potential as a front line defense against climate change, especially as we turn to our urban forest for 1036 the negative emissions needed to achieve our 2030 net zero goal. 1% 3% 3% 4% 0% -
BETTER TREES, MORE TREES, TREE HEALTH
0% 1%
I feel the focus to be on adding trees, not removing trees, with the exception Pruning Removal Removal for Street tree Other The permit The permit I was unclear I have not Other clearance associated other needs replacement (please of safety hazards. Large trees need to stay in the ground for carbon removal. process process went about what pulled a (please with sidewalk specify) take too smoothly application! permit for specify) Strongly promote more tree planting by home and business owners displacement long needed to use tree work
Figure E16. If additional funding was available, which maintenance areas would Figure E15. If you have pulled a permit for tree work, how did you feel about Table E8. If additional funding was available, which maintenance areas would you like to see increased maintenance for street trees? Choose the response that the process? you like to see increased maintenance for street trees? Other, specified. best represents your level of agreement with the statement. 77 - -
Other (Specified) Information Outlet
more avenuestor commiinicalion ano intormaton on mis area Private consults, pamphlets/newsletters 30%
Email
Include info in monthly garbage bill mailings
26%
Social media|
25%
Master gardeners
Anything that allows talking to a real person
Education for kids, sure, but with the understanding that their future is in our hands. We hit reset today, which means we tell kids how we're serious about change, sequestering more carbon than we lose, which means no more burdening them with our carbon debt. 20% Idk
Volunteer in ways other than planting
16%
Table E9. What is the best way to share information with you? Other, specified of Respondents 15%
11% 11%
10%
10% 9%
8% 8%
Other (Specified)
What support does the city offer in this area.
5%
Consult about why tree planted by city looks diseased and the two next to it, which were planted at the same time, are doing great! 3%
Benefits/types of native species
Designing root zones to accommodate large trees
0%
establishing shrubby, pollinator type habitats in city parks Web or Pamphlets, Workshops Community Publictree Farmers Self-guided Engagement Other How do we maintain and enhance our urban forest as a near term net carbon sink? app-based meetings plantings (please (electronic) (hard copy) (Arbor day, (informational demonstra specify) Carbon budget
None
Table E10. Describe your willingness to plant trees on your private property in Napa. (Other, please specify) Figure E17. What is the best way to share information with you (choose all that apply)? 78 Other (Specified)
I own a rental house in Napa and live in Coombsville.
I own rental property in the city
Resident since birth. Homeowner. Local government employee I am a member of the CA Native Plant Society, Napa Valley Chapter.
I am a consulting arborist who has assignments for Napa Valley Cities, School Districts, private property owners I serve on the Parks, Rec, and Tree Advisory Commission Own 3 properties
Table E11. What is your connection to the City of Napa? Other, Specified Connection to Napa
100%
93%
90%
80%
70%
60%
% of Respondents 50%
40%
30%
25%
21%
20%
10% 8%
5% 6%
0% 0% 0%
I live in the I work or own a Thave donate lama member Other Other ama resident fanate apar visitor to Napa broader area business ir money to a of/volunteer for (please specify) (please specify) Napa non-profit a non-profit with
foundation in an interest in
support of trees in Napa
public trees
Figure E18. What is your connection to the City of Napa (choose all that apply)? 79 -
Summary of Open-Ended Responses No Room for More Trees | 38 species that will be better suited to Napa's changing environment • The top reason that property owners are not willing or able to amidst climate change, drought, increasing fire risks, etc.
Reoccurring topics, followed by the number of times mentioned, are plant additional trees on their private properties is a lack of summarized below: Sidewalks/Utilities | 35
available space. Many homeowners feel that their yards are already at capacity and could not support additional trees. • Same as above - tree and infrastructure conflicts are one of Open-Ended Survey Response themes #of times mentioned
(mentioned 33x in q10) the top concerns on Napa residents' minds.
No room for more trees
• Residents are concerned about trees having adequate soil volume More maintenance needed and rooting space, especially when planted in sidewalk strips. Tree Selection (Right Tree, Right Place) | 24 "Right tree, right place" came up often in this and other contexts. • Also similar to the previous two themes - Napa residents are Removal/replacement needed
aware of the concept of tree species and site selection and do Sidewalk/Utility conflicts Maintenance - More Needed; Too Costly; Improper | 37 not feel that the City is currently doing the best it could be at Tree selection (right tree, right place) • Napa residents are concerned that the City's trees (especially implementing this concept.
Napa needs more trees large, mature trees) are not receiving adequate care from the • "Right tree, right place" came up many times in various contexts:
City and more maintenance is needed. • Choosing species that are appropriate for Napa's unique Benefit outweigh costs
• Many survey respondents felt that additional maintenance is environment (sometimes citing a preference for California Shade/heat native species, and other times citing a need for drought- needed, but is not being provided because it is too costly, so Education needed additional funding or resources are needed. tolerant species which may or may not be native Drought-tolerant species • In addition to neglect, some survey respondents are also • Choosing species that have an appropriate growth rate and concerned about the quality of maintenance that trees are form for their planting site, especially if the trees are being Native species
receiving (i.e. improper pruning leading to poor structure planted in sidewalk strips along the right-of-way Aesthetics throughout the life of the tree • Selecting and/or creating appropriate growing spaces that Habitat allow adequate soil volume and rooting space when large, Removal/Replacement | 36 tall-growing shade trees are desired, such as along sidewalks Tree health
• One of the most frequent concerns expressed by survey and bike trails to encourage alternative modes of transport Parks/public resource
respondents was infrastructure conflicts between trees and Preservation sidewalks, streets, utilities, etc. Need More Trees | 19 • Some residents are eager to remove and replace trees that are • Many survey respondents expressed a desire for more trees Renter/HOA
not planted in proper locations, i.e. conflicting with infrastructure throughout Napa, especially to replace mature hazardous trees Carbon
and creating safety hazards, again citing "right tree right place" that needed to be removed and in underserved neighborhoods Invasive/nuisance species • Other residents would prefer to modify the infrastructure and ROW preserve the trees Benefits Outweigh Costs / None | 18 • Many respondents also expressed disappointment that large, • When asked about the top 3 downsides of trees, the most Equity common open-ended response was that they did not feel mature trees in their neighborhoods were removed but never Litter drop replaced, creating both a lack of canopy and potential safety there were negative consequences of trees and/or the benefits Heritage trees hazards due to the empty tree wells. far outweighed any potential downsides (12 responses in Q6) 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% • Many residents also expressed an interest in removing invasive species and replacing them with native and/or drought tolerant Figure E19. Open-Ended Responses.
80 Education | 17 • However, some residents worry that City trees are not Renter/HOA | 11 • Residents desire more education about trees - especially receiving adequate maintenance in order to remain healthy, • The second most frequently-cited reason for being unable to appropriate species/site selection when planting. and would like to see an increase in services and funding. plant trees on private property after a lack of available growing space was being a renter or member of an HOA that
Shade/Heat | 17 Habitat | 13 prohibited it
• One of the most frequently referenced benefits of trees across • Napa residents deeply value the benefits of trees to other all questions was their ability to provide shade, cool wildlife, particularly pollinators, and would like to see trees Invasive Species | 10| neighborhoods, reduce the urban heat island effect, and even planted in an intentional way that makes them a part of a • Community members are concerned that there is an encourage alternative forms of transportation by keeping trails complete healthy ecosystem. overrepresentation of non-native and/or invasive species in cooler. Napa's urban forest.
Preservation | 12 • Residents would like to see nuisance trees removed and Native Species | 15 • Survey respondents are aware of the tradeoffs between tree replaced with more appropriate species, especially in areas • Many survey respondents expressed a desire for more preservation and removal/replacement, and would prefer to where it will improve the ecosystem as a whole.
California native species and/or reduction in the amount of see trees preserved whenever it is safe and feasible. • Species mentioned: tree of heaven; glossy privet; Crape myrtle non-native species in Napa's urban forest. • Survey respondents also understand that the greatest tree • Several residents also brought up Napa's approved planting benefits (especially to carbon, shade, etc.) come from large, Rights-Of-Wayv6 list - specifically, that it needed to be updated/improved and mature trees, and those benefits cannot be replaced • Survey respondents value the unique benefits of trees planted more education on the subject was needed immediately if such trees need to be removed and replanted. along roadways and appreciate the services that P&R provides • Several residents expressed a desire to preserve trees rather to plant and maintain trees in rights-of-way (but it did not get Drought Resistant Species; Water; Fire Risk | 15 than sidewalks where infrastructure conflicts exist. brought up as much as parks) • In addition to native species, community members are
interested in increasing the amount of drought-and heat- Parks/Public Resource | 12 Litter drop | 3 tolerant species in their urban forest, particularly amidst a • Napa residents value the services that P&R provides in • Several survey respondents stated that sap, fruit, and other changing climate and constandy increasing fire risk. creating a healthy urban forest in parks and other spaces as a litter drop from trees was one of the largest or only downsides • Some residents are concerned that existing trees are not public community resource getting enough water and are wary of planting new trees due • Residents would like to see trees that do not drop litter to a lack of water availability. Carbon | 11 planted in places like along sidewalks (again, right tree - right • Another frequently cited benefit of trees is their ability to place), including removal/replacement if necessary sequester and store carbon
• Survey respondents have generally positive views towards • Residents would like to see trees planted (right tree, right Equity | 3 trees, and many feel that having lots of large, mature trees place) in a way that will allow them to grow to their maximum • Truthfully, this term came up a surprisingly low amount of where they live is a quintessential part of the character of their potential and store as much carbon as possible times. It does not appear to be a major concern of community community. (many good quotes about this.) • Several responses specifically referenced Napa's other climate/ members and might not make a carbon goals and policies and that they would like to see trees Tree Health | 13 integrated into those as well Heritage Trees | 2 • Survey respondents felt that assessing tree health and • The desire for the creation of a heritage tree program was providing the maintenance necessary to keep trees healthy is mentioned a couple times (which indicates a need for one of the most important services that the City provides. increased education or outreach since this already exists) 81