2024
URBAN FOREST
PLAN
c CAL FIRE staff performing
community engagement in
Oakland. Credit: CAL FIRE
c Young oak trees planted in
DeFremery Park with support
from CAL FIRE and California
Climate Investments.
c Citywide Tree Inventory
Staff, Davey Resource Group.
Oakland Leadership
Mayor Sheng Thao
Rebecca Kaplan
At Large
Dan Kalb
District 1
Nikki Fortunato Bas
District 2
(Council President)
Carroll Fife
District 3
Janani Ramachandran
District 4
Noel Gallo
District 5
Kevin Jenkins
District 6
Treva Reid
District 7
Love Life
Acknowledgment
We acknowledge "Love Life" as our motto as we
denounce violence in all forms and the conditions
that create violence. We commit to working
against these conditions to create a safe space for
all to operate in love and peace on our streets.
We acknowledge that when we demonstrate love,
we also manifest qualities of respect, kindness,
grace, truth, understanding, humbleness, and
forgiveness towards each other. We commit to
acts of love as an intentional force to generate
tangible solutions, in regards to all policies,
declarations, recommendations, resolutions,
appointments, and actions.
We recognize as leaders, we must set an example
and precedent for those who have entrusted us
with these duties. We accept the responsibility
to make our city and community a better place
by bringing inspiration instead of insults,
contributions instead of complaints, constructive
feedback instead of criticism, and even in our
passion for all issues no matter how difficult, we
lead with the guiding principle of love.
We ask that you share with us in this commitment
and practice of exhibiting love, good faith, positive
energy, and respect in how you comment, present
information, report out, or inform. We appreciate
all contributions to this space and even when
expressing hurt, harm, disappointment, dispute,
or disagreement, we request that we lead with
love in your heart.
We acknowledge Love in practice even when
there are differences in opinions, strategies,
procedures, and processes, and we will seek to
find common ground, and tangible solutions that
demonstrate love for our city, its residents, our
community, and all constituents.
We acknowledge and recognize that when we
model this practice of love, it will establish a norm
that will resonate and be exemplified throughout
our city and create the change we all wish to see in
our communities.
We acknowledge that when we lead with love we
are able to uplift a thriving city rooted in equity,
equality, justice, inclusion, and opportunity for
all regardless of race, gender, age, class, socio
economic status, nationality, religion, sexual
preference, housing status, or political affiliation.
We acknowledge that when we uplift love, we uplift
those impacted by violence of all and any kind. We
acknowledge that when we uplift love we uplift
traditions of our ancestors, our arts, our culture,
our businesses, our educators, our unhoused, our
civic servants, and all who contribute to the fabric
and well being of our community.
We commit to the action of “Love Life” as our motto
and mantra.
Acknowledgement | 3
Table of Contents
Love Life Acknowledgment ......... 3
Foreword by
Dr. Ayodele Nzinga, MFA, Ph.D.,
Oakland Poet Laureate ................ 6
Executive Summary.................... 10
Section 1.
Introduction................................22
What Does Equity in
Urban Forestry Mean..............................25
The Planning Process ...................................26 A Brief History of the Land
We Now Call Oakland..............................28
A Brief History of the City of Oakland.........32
Addressing Inequities in Oakland...............41
The Benefits of Trees. ..................................42 Section 2.
An Equity-Centered Approach... 48
A Legacy of Community
Tree Stewardship.....................................50 Urban Forest Plan
Community Engagement .......................54
Community Urban Forest Concerns
and Priorities............................................60 4 Section 3.
Oakland’s Urban Forest.............. 62
Tree Canopy and Land Cover.......................63
Tree Canopy Equity Analysis ........................68
Public Tree Inventory....................................71 Summary of the Current State of Oakland’s
Urban Forest ............................................86 Section 4.
Managing Oakland’s
Urban Forest................................ 88
Key Insights about Oakland Parks
& Tree Division Operations ....................90
Hierarchy of Urban
Forest Management Needs....................91
Section 5.
Implementation....................... 112
Guiding Principles
for Implementation..............................115
Goals and Strategies...................................118 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ............... 160
APPENDIX A:
Operations Scenarios ............... 162
APPENDIX B:
Plans, Studies,
and Regulations ........................ 170
References ................................. 174
Table of Contents | 5
Foreword
We often refer to ourselves as stewards of nature.
Climate change, one of the most immense
challenges we face in modernity, signals we
could do a better job. What we do and ignore can
profoundly affect the future of those who come
after us. We are not called to simply steward nature
but to see ourselves as an integral part of it. Our
most minor acts can significantly impact the world
in which we live.1
“those in rented rooms
only have rented trees”
–Dr. Ayodele Nzinga
The Urban Forest Plan (Plan) is a condensed history
of trees in Huichin, part of the unceded land of the
Chochenyo Muwekma Ohlone, known as Oakland.
This Plan, filled with facts, graphs, and science
clearly outlines the benefit and necessity of trees,
and supports robust and intentional investment in
equitably greening Oakland.
Dr. Ayodele Nzinga,
MFA, Ph.D.
Poet Laureate,
Oakland, California
The Plan's authors want us to think about the
Urban Forest in a context that allows for our
holistic understanding of the importance of
trees in our lives. This Plan shows the correlation
between urban trees and restorative pathways to
environmental justice, economic gains, and health.
The term “Urban Forest” invites us to think about
trees in a particular city setting—distinct from
suburban or rural settings. We are considering the
intentional greening of the most peopled parts of
our built environments. When we think about the
design of open spaces and cityscapes, we must
look for the opportunity to include trees. They add
to the quality of life in tangible and measurable
ways.
Trees planted today will significantly impact the
health of neighborhoods tomorrow.
Trees are interconnected. They share resources
below the surface, strengthening one another
and supporting the emerging “under” forest that
ensures the perpetuation of trees. People are
similarly interconnected; when resources are not
evenly shared, the disadvantage will harm the
whole. People and trees are interconnected and
interdependent. We could learn a lot from trees
about equitable distribution and mutual benefit.
6 | Foreword
"If we represent knowledge as a tree, we know that divided things are yet connected. We know that to observe the divisions and ignore the connections is to destroy the tree."
-Wendell Berry2
My oldest daughter Ebony was conscious as a small
child of the absence of trees and green space in the
part of East Oakland in which we lived. She traveled
in the backseat across the High Street Bridge to
go to preschool in Alameda. On the way home one
day, she remarked that she wished we lived in the
park—Alameda. Her yearning for green spaces
connects with my memories of simple summer
outings on sweltering days in the flatlands. We
would pile into the car, buy snow cones and drive
from the flatlands up into the Oakland Hills, where
the houses were further apart, separated by green
open space, flowers, and trees. Our return to the
flatlands, where we could see the heat waves rising
from the asphalt, was as sobering as the drive into
the greenness was soothing.
The Urban Forest Plan in support of the equitable
greening of Oakland points out the connections
between a lack of tree canopy and the physical,
economic, and quality of life of communities.
Planning is a precursor to action; the adoption of
the Plan lays the foundation for moving forward in
an intentional fashion to ensure that all of Oakland
benefits from its relationship with nature.
I have a relationship with 'the urban forest' or the
lack thereof. Trees matter to me. They matter to
all of us whether we live in neighborhoods with
adequate canopy or we live in neighborhoods that
would benefit from intentional greening—trees or
the lack of trees matters.
Foreword | 7
We were green adjacent – we intuitively sought out
green spaces sensing their benefit. I drove my kids
to summer camp in Laytonville from the flatlands
of formerly redlined communities, South Berkeley,
East, and West Oakland.
Traveling North towards the green ruralness of
Laytonville provided the same experience for us
as the short trips to the Oakland Hills. We could
feel the difference in our bodies. On the way
to Laytonville, there is a stretch of windy road,
distinguished by trees obviously a hundred years
or older. They line the road obscuring the houses
beyond, creating an ancient border with branches
crisscrossing the sky above. We call it the Cathedral
of the Trees. One rides through this grove as one
walks through an old and stately church with an air
of reverence and a sense of place that feels holy.
Even short trips to green spaces can have beneficial
effects on the human psyche. "The trunks of trees are separate, but the roots hold on to each other
tightly, and the branches at the top
are interwoven. They are united at
the deepest and the higher level. Men
should be like an immense forest."
-Romano Battaglia2
c Soul Tree Forest by Deanna Van
Buren with spoken poetry by Dr.
Ayodele Nzinga, Yerba Buena Center
for the Arts, San Francisco. Credit:
Deanna Van Buren
8 | Foreword
c Self portrait by Dr. Ayodele Nzinga.
Everything is connected.
I raised my children on the edge of greenness
in redlined neighborhoods. Maps of these
neighborhoods held up against maps that reflect
communities with inadequate tree canopy
reveal a contested relationship. You can track
environmental disparity economically, in health
statistics, and life expectancies.
We have a reciprocal relationship with nature
that requires our contribution. Trees are essential
to life on this planet—they are the earth's
lungs – they breathe for us. Think of trees as
primordial guardians of the environment. The
care and intention we invest in lush green spaces
with adequate tree canopy in all Oakland's
neighborhoods is an investment in all Oaklanders
now and in the future.
As you read the Urban Forest Plan take the
description of Oakland from the beginning of the
Plan with you through your consideration of the
scientific framing of facts, maps, and charts, and
hold in mind a curiosity about the actions taken
and not taken that bring us to this point. Then ask,
what actions are required to reforest Oakland and
create the greenest future possible?
c Mural depicting Oakland artists as community leaders–51st Street and Shattuck Avenue.
Credit: Kev Choice
Foreword | 9
10 | Executive Summary
Executive
Summary
Executive Summary | 11
Introduction and
Purpose
The trees lining Oakland’s streets and
shading its parks have long been valued as
an important community asset and a cultural
symbol of the community’s strength and
unity. Oakland is named after the native coast
live oak trees (Quercus agrifolia) that once
dominated the landscape when this land was
known as Lisjan Village and occupied by the
native Ohlone people. The oak tree holds a
special place in Oakland’s identity, as seen
in the Jack London coast live oak proudly
growing in front of City Hall, the City’s tree
logo, and the many tree references and
images used by Oakland businesses, artists,
and community groups.
Today, Oakland’s urban forest is made
up of over 500 different tree species, and
includes 56,000 street trees, 12,000 trees in
landscaped parks, and a vast yet unknown
number of trees on private property and in
open space areas.
WHY TREES MATTER
Trees are a valuable community
resource that provide many benefits
to Oakland. They clean the air, create
shade, enhance physical and mental
health, improve water quality, absorb
greenhouse gases, reduce energy
use, beautify neighborhoods, foster a
sense of community, support wildlife,
provide jobs, reduce stormwater
runoff, and mitigate climate change.
The role that trees play in reducing
the effects of climate change is
becoming increasingly important
as Oakland experiences more days
above 90°F. Studies have shown that
neighborhoods with large trees in
parks, along streets, and yards can
see temperatures that are 2° to 9°F
cooler than areas without trees.
See Section One for a detailed list of
tree benefits.
Oakland’s Urban Forest
Oakland’s urban forest is made
up of all the trees that surround
us every day. From those lining
our streets and in City parks, to
those growing in our yards, around
businesses, and open spaces.
c The historic Jack London Oak in front of
Oakland City Hall.
12 | Executive Summary
A healthy and abundant urban forest requires
investment and long-term management. Over
the past fifteen years, the City of Oakland has
primarily taken a reactive approach to managing
the urban forest. Recognizing the need for a
more proactive approach, the city embarked on
a comprehensive assessment of its trees and
management practices. The ultimate goal was
to develop an urban forest plan for Oakland that
identifies ways to make lasting investments in the
long-term health of the urban forest and ensure
that the benefits of trees are distributed equitably
throughout the community. An urban forest
plan is a tool to identify long-term management
recommendations and potential funding
mechanisms to grow a healthy and equitable
urban forest. It is a guiding document and is
not prescriptive by design. It allows for flexibility
in implementation based on new information,
resources, partners, and funding.
With grant funding from CAL FIRE and California Climate Investments, the City of Oakland engaged with the community and Davey Resource Group, Inc. to create Oakland’s first Urban Forest Plan (Plan). The Plan includes five sections:
Section 1. Introduction: Acknowledge the history of Oakland’s urban forest and identify the many benefits trees provide to the community.
Section 2. An Equity Centered Approach: Identify equity issues and describe the results of the community engagement process.
Section 3. Oakland’s Urban Forest: Urban forest structural and equity analyses based on satellite canopy data and a street and park tree inventory.
Section 4. Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest: Analysis of the Oakland Parks & Tree Division operations and hierarchy of needs.
Section 5. Implementation: A collection of goals, strategies, and action items for meeting the needs of the community and equitably growing the urban forest. c View of East Oakland from BART platform.
Executive Summary | 13
Equity is at the
Heart of the Urban
Forest Plan
Oakland’s trees are not equitably
distributed, and their benefits are not fairly
shared. Oakland’s frontline communities
— those most vulnerable due to racial
discrimination, poverty, disability, housing
insecurity, linguistic isolation, and poor air
quality — have fewer trees than more affluent
parts of Oakland and suffer disproportionately
greater environmental injustices because of
this. These communities have the least canopy
cover but are in the most need of the benefits
that trees provide (see Map 1 and Section 3).
The Plan’s recommendations prioritize
equity by focusing tree planting, tree
pruning, community engagement,
relationship building, and other services in
Oakland’s frontline communities. To ensure
equity in implementation of broader citywide
recommendations, the Plan requires that work
begins in frontline communities before moving
into other parts of Oakland (see Section 5).
Tree canopy and access
to trees varies widely by
neighborhood.
14 | Executive Summary
Engagement and Outreach
Engaging the Oakland community is an essential first step in developing an equitable urban forest. To evaluate community values, understanding, and appreciation of trees, a 50-question survey on Oakland’s urban forest was developed. The survey was distributed widely with paper copies available at events and on-line versions, in multiple languages, available through a dedicated project website. The website also provided project and urban forestry background information, including links to tree canopy and street and park tree resource assessments, prerecorded presentations, and interactive tree canopy maps.
The Plan’s engagement activities followed
best practices by partnering with four local
organizations with established relationships
within the community:
• California Interfaith Power & Light
• Common Vision
• Forest & Tree
• Trees for Oakland with the Oakland
Parks & Recreation Foundation
c Volunteers and City staff collaborate to plant trees in Union Point Park.
Partner-led engagement activities
emphasized reaching frontline community
members and occurred organically at inperson and virtual community events and meetings, as well as through email, social
media outlets, and newsletters. The partners
shared information about the urban forest
and collected survey responses. The survey
was open from April 2022 to August 2022 and
collected over 2,400 responses (see Section 2
for an overview of the results).
Executive Summary | 15
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT THEMES
The Urban Forest Plan addresses nine primary themes identified during the community engagement process:
1. The City of Oakland must provide equitable tree planting and pruning services. Proactive, regular tree pruning and hazardous tree removal will cost an average of $17 to $20 million per year with an additional $7.3 million per year for tree planting. Funding needs to be secured to perform this work.
2. Trees can be a public safety issue. Unmaintained trees can create safety hazards while maintained trees enhance public safety, improve sightlines, and reduce tripping hazards underscoring the need for regular maintenance (see #1).
3. The community values the emotional and ecosystem benefits of trees.
Adopting and funding this plan is essential to grow and maintain the urban forest to equitably provide the benefits that the community values.
4. The urban forest needs to be sustained for future generations. This is a 50- year plan that is designed to be regularly updated. It includes scenarios for equitably maintaining Oakland’s tree canopy.
5. The community wants green job training, education, and volunteer opportunities. This plan identifies concrete actions to increase these opportunities through collaboration between the City, community groups, and local educational institutions.
6. Social justice is critical. Equity is at the heart of this plan and is a core value in all recommendations and actions.
7. Appropriate tree species should be planted. This plan recommends thoughtful tree selection based on research, climate science, and arboricultural best practices.
8. Tree-related sidewalk issues need to be fixed. Action items identify filling vacant City staff positions and collaboration among City departments to implement industry best practices to minimize conflicts between trees and sidewalks.
9. The community is unfamiliar with Oakland’s tree protection and planting policies. This plan addresses the City’s need to improve community engagement as well as tree-related policies.
16 | Executive Summary
Urban Forest Composition and Function
Two assessments of Oakland’s urban forest were conducted as part of the development of the Urban Forest Plan (see Section 3 for full details):
• Tree Canopy and OAKLAND LAND COVER
Landcover Analysis.
2018 satellite imagery was used
to determine the amount of
Oakland’s area that is covered
by tree canopy, cement/asphalt/
structures (impervious surfaces),
grasslands/low-lying vegetation,
bare soil, and open water.
Oakland’s overall tree canopy
decreased from 22.3% in 2014
to 21.5% in 2018. Based on this
trend, we estimate overall tree
canopy would be 20.6% in 2024.
Furthermore, the canopy is not
equitably distributed. Canopy
cover ranges from a low of 9% in
several frontline communities to
a high of 43% in some affluent
areas in the Oakland hills (see
Oakland Tree Canopy & Landcover
Assessment).
Executive Summary | 17
• Street and Park Tree Inventory.
A team of arborists conducted in-person
inspections of 68,000 City street and park
trees to record their location, species,
size, maintenance need, and other
information. They also identified over
29,000 vacant planting sites and over
2,000 tree stumps that could potentially
be planted with new trees. Additional
assessment of the vacant sites and
stumps, including a review of belowground utilities is needed to determine if sites are suitable for planting.
Oakland’s street and park tree inventory
data was used to calculate the
environmental benefits of these trees,
including carbon storage, pollution
removal, total value, and more (see table
below and Section 3). In addition to the
benefits that can be quantified,
Oakland’s urban forest also provides
benefits that cannot be quantified such
as improvements to mental and physical
health, wildlife habitat, and beautifying
the city. While these are not included
in the dollar amount value, they are
important benefits for the community.
The benefits that Oakland’s urban forest
provides are essential for the quality of
life of city residents, however the urban
forest is at risk. Oakland’s urban forest
(and the many benefits that it provides)
are threatened by drought, climate
change, fire, human development,
pests, a lack of regular maintenance,
and other forces. The Urban Forest Plan
aims to make trees a priority in Oakland
and address the forces that threaten its
health and sustainability.
QUANTIFIABLE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS OF OAKLAND’S
INVENTORIED STREET AND PARK TREES
Annual Benefits
Gross Carbon Sequestration (tons/year) 23,429
($/year) $101,372
Avoided Runoff (gallons/year) 25,400,000
($/year) $47,637
Pollution Removal (pounds/year) 26,039
($/year) $219,072
Total Annual Benefits ($/year) $368,081
Structural Benefits
Lifetime Carbon Storage (pounds) 65,832,000
($) $5,613,781
Replacement Value ($) $191,687,400
Total Structural Value ($) $197,301,181
18 | Executive Summary
City Operations Analysis
The Plan highlights program deficiencies
and also provides recommendations to more
equitably, efficiently, and effectively manage
Oakland’s urban forest.
The image below shows the hierarchy of urban
forestry management needs. Needs are colorcoded to indicate the Division’s successes and areas that require significant improvement.
Many of the foundational needs are being met
except budget, staff, training, and equipment.
The needs further up the pyramid are lacking
and need to be addressed to effectively meet
the community’s desires and sustainably and
equitably maintain Oakland’s urban forest.
INNOVATION
PUBLIC OUTREACH &
EDUCATION
TREE PLANTING PROGRAM
TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM
PROACTIVE TREE MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM
DEAD/HIGH RISK TREE REMOVAL
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
BUDGET, STAFF, TRAINING & EQUIPMENT
TREE INVENTORY AND URBAN TREE CANOPY DATA
TREE ORDINANCES FOUNDATIONAL
ADVANCED
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
ASSESSING OAKLAND ON THE HIERARCHY OF
URBAN FORESTRY MANAGEMENT NEEDS
= Established and implementation is fair to good.
= Established but in need of improvement
= Not in place and/or in need
of significant improvement
The City’s urban forestry operations were
analyzed to understand the current care
and maintenance levels and provide
recommendations for improvement (see
Section Four).
Public tree maintenance is the responsibility of
Oakland Public Works, Parks & Tree Division.
Significant funding reductions since the 1990s
have hampered operations, resulting in a
substantial backlog of deferred tree
maintenance and a shortage of services
available to the community. To illustrate,
the tree inventory revealed that 92% of
Oakland’s street and park trees require
some level of pruning.
Executive Summary | 19
The Plan’s operational analysis identifies key insights that negatively affect the Parks & Tree Division’s operations and the management of Oakland’s urban forest:
1. Deferred maintenance amplifies Oakland’s emergency workload.
2. There is a major backlog of dead and/or hazardous trees that continues to increase.
3. The Parks & Tree Division is in an operationally reactive position, which is logistically challenging, inefficient, and costly.
4. Lack of tree maintenance is a source of frustration for the community.
5. Lack of tree planting, community engagement, and public outreach programs make it difficult to bring awareness to the urban forest in the face of Oakland’s many other competing priorities. c The Parks & Tree Division uses a variety of specialized vehicles to perform tree work throughout Oakland. Pictured: crane (left) picks up dead tree stem for removal and disposal, chip truck (middle) collects wood chip debris from a chipper attached to it on the rear (not visible in photo), large aerial (right) allows tree trimmers to safely access trees for pruning and removal work. 20 | Executive Summary
OPERATIONS & TREE
CANOPY SCENARIOS
The Plan provides scenarios to improve the
Parks & Tree Division operations and tree
planting, but implementation requires staffing
and a sufficient budget.
Operations Scenarios. The Plan presents two
operations scenarios and identifies the tasks,
number of staff, required equipment, and
costs to effectively manage Oakland’s urban
forest (Appendix A).
• Operations Scenario A: City staff
handle routine work while contractors
assist with backlog—average cost of
$21 million per year.
• Operations Scenario B: City staff are
assisted by contractors in addressing
both routine work and backlog—
average cost of $17 million per year.
Tree Canopy Scenarios (see Section 3). Three
options for tree canopy goals over a ten-year
period (2024-2034) are presented in the Plan.
Scenario 1 is provided as a point of reference but
is not a viable path forward. Scenarios 2 and 3
will require public-private partnerships to plant
trees on different property types. Tree planting
will be prioritized in frontline communities.
• Tree Canopy Scenario 1: Maintain
current trend—plant zero (0) trees,
resulting in an estimated reduction of
tree canopy to 18.6% by 2034.
• Tree Canopy Scenario 2: No net loss—
plant 5,903 trees per year to maintain
20.6% canopy cover, with an average
annual cost of $7.3 million.
• Tree Canopy Scenario 3: Increase
canopy to 22.5% - plant 12,536 trees with
an average annual cost of $15.6 million.
Adopting and funding an operations scenario
and tree canopy scenario will result in:
1. Proactive pruning of all street and park
trees (moving away from emergency
response which is more expensive and
has long-term impacts on the overall
health of Oakland’s urban forest).
2. Providing equitable services to frontline
communities.
3. Planting of approximately 6,000 to 12,500
trees per year by the City and community
groups and prioritizing work in frontline
communities where trees are needed
most. This will set the groundwork for
achieving canopy equity.
4. Jobs, education, and additional benefits
and opportunities for current and
future generations.
c City staff plant street trees with students.
Executive Summary | 21
Implementation
The Plan’s Implementation Section
(Section 5) addresses the Parks & Tree
Division’s challenges and needs, identifying
opportunities and recommendations to
effectively and equitably maintain and grow
Oakland’s urban forest in a way that meets
community needs. This section identifies nine
goals that are categorized into three themes
(programs, people, policy). Each goal has two
to five strategies, and each strategy has one
to six action items. In total, there are over 70
specific action items for equitably improving
Oakland’s urban forest.
c Volunteers planting trees in Sobrante Park.
Adopting the Urban Forest Plan is the first
step towards growing and sustaining an
equitable urban forest in Oakland. However,
implementation cannot occur without funding.
A variety of potential funding sources are
described within the Plan. It is crucial that
consistent and relaible funding sources
are identified and implemented for the
sustained maintenance and care of Oakland’s
urban forest.
Section One
Introduction
The City of Oakland is pleased to present its first
Urban Forest Plan (Plan). Developed with funding
from a California Department of Forestry & Fire
Protection (CAL FIRE) Urban and Community
Forestry Program and California Climate
Investment grant, the Plan focuses on improving
inequities in Oakland’s tree canopy and the
management and care of public trees. Through a
dedicated equity-based approach, the Plan’s goals,
strategies, and actions strive to ensure that all
of Oakland’s neighborhoods and residents have
access to a healthy and abundant urban forest and
the many benefits trees provide.
The Plan provides insights into the current state of
Oakland’s urban forest and its management and
outlines recommendations and actions to ensure
it is maintained as an equitable and sustainable
community asset. It provides the City and its
partners with a strategic, equity-based approach
for managing and preserving Oakland’s trees to
enhance and sustain tree benefits as well as the
overall aesthetic and livability of the city.
What is the urban forest?
Oakland’s urban forest is the network of
trees and other vegetation in the city. It
includes trees growing along streets, as well
as in parks, yards, and private spaces.
“Urban forests are systems of trees, other
vegetation, and water within any urban
area. They can be understood as dynamic
green infrastructure that provides cities
and municipalities with environmental,
economic, and social benefits. Urban forests
are forests for people.” (Michael Leff, The
Sustainable Urban Forest).
PLANNING FOR THE
FUTURE
“The best time to plant a tree
was twenty years ago. The
second-best time is now.”
Popular adage
The Ohlone people, who have
inhabited this land for over 7,000
years, have a deep-rooted cultural
relationship with the land that
exemplifies sustainable practices.
Their approach to sustainability
far exceeds our contemporary
understanding of the term. As a
modern city, the Ohlone’s approach
to sustainability raises the question of
whether we can formulate plans that
span 1,000 years or even 100 years.
While our daily lives may not always
prioritize long-term perspectives,
it is crucial to recognize that our
actions and inactions can have lasting
impacts. Embracing a long-term view
is essential for the well-being of future
generations.
Cities often create plans for different
types of infrastructure, but trees are
uniquely different because they are
biologically alive; and despite our
advances in modern technology, you
cannot just build a full-size tree. You
have to grow it. This requires both
patience and foresight.
Introduction | 23
An Equity
Framework
An equity framework recognizes that all
communities experience the same level of access
to and benefits from resources, services, and
opportunity and seeks to address historical and
systemic disparities to create more equitable
conditions and access to opportunity for
communities that have been and are underserved.
Oakland’s frontline communities include those who
are most impacted by racial disparities, including
Black, Indigenous,
and People of Color
(BIPOC) residents,
low-income
residents, residents
with disabilities,
those with housing
insecurity or
linguistic isolation,
and others.
“Tree planting is an impactful
and achievable solution to buffer
frontline communities from
the effects of climate change.
Advancing environmental justice
requires clean air, cooling tree
canopies and healthy futures
for all communities, and this is a
tangible step toward achieving
those outcomes in Oakland.”
- Darlene Flynn,
Director, Oakland Department of
Race & Equity
ALIGNING ACROSS
PLANNING EFFORTS
Oakland has a history of planning that
has focused directly or partially on the
city’s urban forest, including:
• GREENSTREETS (1981)
• Oakland Central District Street Tree
Study (1984)
• Open Space Conservation and
Recreation (OSCAR) Element of the
Oakland General Plan (1996)
• Oakland Street Tree Plan (1998 – not
formally adopted)
• West Oakland Reforestation Plan
(2013)
• Owning Our Air: The West Oakland
Community Action Plan (2019)
• East Oakland Neighborhood
Initiative (EONI) (2019)
• General Plan (update in progress)
• Equitable Climate Action Plan (ECAP)
(2020)
• Oakland Vegetation Management
Plan (anticipated 2024)
This Urban Forest Plan is built upon
these plans and is a direct outcome
of the ECAP action item CR-2: Expand
and Protect Tree Canopy Coverage,
which specifically calls for the creation
of an Urban Forest Plan that:
• “Prioritizes strategies to address
disparities among neighborhoods in
tree canopy coverage;
• Ensures that carbon sequestration
is a major factor in tree planting
targets, selection of tree species,
and tree management practices;
• Establishes a clear and sustainable
funding mechanism for ongoing tree
maintenance; and
• Establishes a protocol and goals for
community partnerships for tree
planting and maintenance.”
24 | Section One
What Does Equity in
Urban Forestry Mean?
The goal of equity-focused urban and community forestry is to achieve equal environmental, economic, social, and cultural urban forest benefits across ALL neighborhoods, regardless of race, income, disability, or other characteristics.
Creating an equitable and healthy urban forest means allocating the resources and opportunities needed to improve the size, quality, number, and maintenance of trees and greenspaces in neighborhoods that may be lacking tree canopy and greenspace. Equitable urban forestry involves:
• Prioritizing tree planting and maintenance efforts in areas with fewer resources to address tree canopy disparities.
• Engaging BIPOC and frontline community members and persons with disabilities in planning and management to ensure that neighborhood needs and priorities are considered, promoting a more inclusive urban forest.
• Considering environmental justice implications to ensure that the urban forest does not disproportionately benefit or burden certain community members based on factors such as race, ethnicity, income, or disability.
Following these steps can lead to the creation of an urban forest that is accessible and fair for all. c Street mural in East Oakland, unknown artist.
Introduction | 25
The Planning Process
The development of the Urban Forest Plan involved:
What do
we have?
Tree Inventory &
Tree Canopy
What do
we want?
Community
Engagement
How do we
get there?
Goal Setting
How are
we doing?
Monitoring
• Comprehensive analysis of the existing
urban forest, including the inventory and
evaluation of the city’s public trees, and an
analysis of citywide tree canopy cover and
distribution.
• Assessment of Oakland’s current forestry
operations, programs, and policies.
• Community and stakeholder engagement
to gather input and insights to ensure that
the Plan reflects the needs, priorities, and
aspirations of the Oakland community.
• Development of specific goals,
recommendations, and strategies based
on data analysis, information assessments,
and community feedback together with
established industry science and best
management practices.
• Establishment of an on-going process to
monitor implementation progress and allow
for continuous adaptation and improvements
to the Plan.
26 | Section One
DOES THE URBAN FOREST PLAN ADDRESS FIRE
PREVENTION?
A significant portion of Oakland is rated “very high” wildfire risk by the California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). The areas rated as having a “very high” wildfire risk are also home to the majority of Oakland’s tree canopy — the Oakland Hills — making Oakland’s urban forest and its benefits vulnerable to loss due to wildfire. The loss of trees from the 1991 Oakland Hills Fire alone led to a decrease in Oakland’s tree canopy from 21% to 19% (Nowak, 1993, p. 315).
THE 1991 OAKLAND HILLS FIRE
(“THE TUNNEL FIRE”)
Initially sparked by a vehicle fire on October 19, 1991, the fire quickly spread through the hills above Oakland, fueled by high winds and tinder-dry vegetation.
The fire burned for several days, and eventually destroyed more than 3,000 homes and killed 25 people. The damage
caused by the fire was estimated to be around $1.5 billion, making it one of the costliest natural disasters in California's history up to that time.
In addition to the loss of life and property, the 1991
Oakland Hills fire also had a significant impact on the local community. Many residents were displaced and left homeless, and the loss of homes and personal possessions had a lasting psychological impact on those affected. The fire also had a major impact on the local ecosystem, as many of the trees and vegetation in the affected area were destroyed. This led to increased erosion and sedimentation in local waterways and a decline in the local population of wildlife.
VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PLAN
While we acknowledge that the topics of wildfire prevention and urban forestry overlap in this sense, the Urban Forest Plan does not speak specifically to wildfire prevention. This topic is covered in the Oakland Vegetation Management Plan.
d The 1991 Oakland Hills Fire caused major destruction to property and the city's ecosystem. c Aftermath of 1991 Oakland Hills Fire.
Introduction | 27
A Brief History of the Land We Now Call
Oakland
This section reflects on Oakland’s past to help gain a better understanding of where Oakland is today.
The Land
Imagine an abundant coastal landscape of oldgrowth oak and redwood forests, meadows, wildflowers, and creeks running down hills into
marshlands and tall grasses. The hills are bare of
trees but teeming with native shrubs and grasses.
The redwoods tower over hilly valleys and the oaks
stretch across flatlands. The plants provide shelter
c View of the San Francisco Bay sunrise from the North Oakland Hills. and food for a great diversity of wildlife, including
grizzly bears, elk, coyotes, wolves, jaguars, bobcats,
condors, and small mammals and reptiles. Sea lions
and mussels line the coasts, the open bay teems
with fish and crustaceans, and salmon traverse
freshwater creeks and open waters. The air is clean,
the land is free of pollution, and you can drink
clean water out of all freshwater streams. This land
we are describing is what we now call “Oakland,
California,” approximately 250 years ago.3, 4, 5
Pre-1800s
The Ohlone people inhabited the region for
7,000+ years, relying on native oak tree acorns
for sustenance. They sustainably tended to the
land, employing controlled fires to enhance acorn
yield. The Ohlone and fellow Bay Area Indigenous
communities faced cultural assimilation, European
diseases, and harsh living conditions upon the
arrival of Spanish explorers and missionaries
(Bay Area Equity Atlas).
Late 1700s to 1848
Logging results in the
loss of thousands of
redwood trees.
1850s–1890s
Logging continues during
the Gold Rush for mining
purposes and for the
building boom in San
Francisco. One old-growth
redwood, Old Survivor,
remains in Oakland today.
28 | Section One
BAY AREA’S NATIVE
CULTURE RESURGENCE
In the 20th century, the Bay Area saw a resurgence
of Indigenous culture and activism as Native
American communities worked to reclaim their
heritage and assert their rights. In the 1960s
and 1970s, the American Indian Movement (AIM)
emerged as a powerful force for Indigenous rights,
and the Bay Area was home to AIM chapters
(Eskew, 2010, pp. 150-154). Today, the Ohlone, Miwok,
and Pomo, and other Bay Area Native American
communities are working to preserve and promote
their cultural traditions and histories.
In 2022, the City of Oakland returned Rinihmu Pulte'irekne (Sequoia Point), five acres of land in Joaquin Miller Park, to the Ohlone people through the Sogorea Te’ Land Trust (Gómez-Van Cortright, 2022). This is a cultural conservation easement that gives the Confederated Villages of Lisjan “nearly full control over the use of the land, for cultural, environmental, and educational uses, in perpetuity” (Orenstein, 2022). Such an easement is one of the first instances where a U.S. city has ceded land back to native peoples for their cultural use.
d Demonstration Against Anti-Indian
Legislation. Credit: Victor Ochoa,
California Ethnic and Multicultural
Archives, UCSB
1850s
Oakland passes an
ordinance to prohibit
the removal of oak
trees to help preserve
existing trees.
1853
The Fruitvale District (then Fruit
Vale) is named and the first
orchard is planted. The area
became a major fruit growing
region (Marshall, A. S. (2017).
East Bay Hills: A brief history.
The History Press).
1860
Oaklander Stephen Nolan
begins selling Eucalyptus
seeds and nursery stock to
the public, resulting in the
first distribution program
for Eucalyptus landscape
trees through the state.
1869
Oakland is chosen
as the western
terminus of the
Transcontinental
Railroad, securing its
future as a city and
major port.
Ohlone map of San
Francisco Bay Area. Credit:
UC Berkeley Centers for
Educational Justice &
Community Engagement
Introduction | 29
The People
The San Francisco Bay Area has a rich and complex
history that stretches back thousands of years,
with a diverse array of Indigenous cultures and
communities that have shaped the region.
The Ohlone people were the first known
inhabitants of the Bay Area, with a history that
dates back at least 7,000 years. The Ohlone are
a group of Native American tribes known for
their sophisticated and diverse cultures, as well as
complex system of governance.
A network of villages spanned the region, providing
opportunities to interact with each other, trade
resources and technology, and share culture.
The Lisjan Village occupied the land known as
today’s Oakland and nearby Alameda, Emeryville,
and Berkeley.
c Life in an Ohlone Village near the San Francisco Bay. Credit: Amy Hosa and Linda Yamane, San Mateo Historical Society.
1886
Joaquin Miller
plants 69 acres
of trees in what
was once treeless hills.
1900s–1920s
The “City Beautiful” movement
in Oakland has a dual impact
on trees. It brings about
positive changes through the
planting of new trees for urban
enhancement. However, it
also has a negative aspect as
numerous established street
trees are removed to facilitate
street expansion (Tarver, 2015,
pp. 69-70).
1903
The “City Beautiful”
Movement inspires
a citizen-led action
committee, and
many new trees are
planted throughout
Oakland’s streets
and parks.
1910
The new Park
Commission publishes
a report identifying
opportunities for
tree planting and
preservation in City
parks, including
preserving existing
stands of oak trees
in Lakeside Park (the
largest park in the City
at the time).
30 | Section One
The Ohlone are physically, culturally, and spiritually
connected to their natural environment. Their
cultures include ceremonies and stories involving
land and animal spirits. As the first known
inhabitants, they worked with and respected the
region’s abundant landscape to provide them with
food, shelter, and their essential needs. They used
techniques to manage and grow the populations of
plants and animals that they gathered, cultivated,
hunted, and fished. Their reciprocal relationships
with nature helped sustain them from generation
to generation. We can learn much from native
cultures to inform what we may refer to today as
“sustainability goals.” Their societies flourished for
many generations due to a deep consciousness
and respect for the land, which guided their culture
and actions.6
California’s early American history was shaped
by exploitation of the land and native people.
Gold was discovered in California in 1848, soon
after the territory was annexed to the United States
(California achieved statehood in 1850). During this
time, old growth redwood forests were logged, and
oak woodlands were cleared for a growing city. 7
The Ohlone people were forced to leave their
ancestral lands and move to missions located
in San Francisco, and San Jose (Fremont), where
they were forced into labor and converted to
Christianity. Many died from disease or abuse.
In 1850, the State legislature implemented the
Indentured Servitude Act which authorized the
capture of Indians for use as slaves. Vigilantes
hunted California Indians, with financial
sponsorships and rewards provided by
the U.S. Government. Orphaned Indian
children were forced into slavery. Laws
were passed to prevent anyone with
one-quarter or more Indian blood
from testifying in court.8 This period of
colonization had a significant impact
on the Ohlone population, culture,
and way of life, and many of their
traditions were lost.5,9
c Painting of three Ohlone people in a tule
boat in the San Francisco Bay by Louis
Choris, 1822
1910–1913
Frank Haven plants
nearly 8 million trees
(mostly blue gum
eucalyptus) in the
Oakland Hills for lumber
production, only to
discover the species is
not suitable for lumber.
1930s
The City of
Oakland begins
providing treerelated services,
including planting,
maintenance,
removal, and
sidewalk repair.
1930–1960
The Federal Housing Administration
and Home Owner’s Loan Corporation’s
redlining policy contributes to urban
decay of marginalized communities in
cities across the U.S., including Oakland.
People of color are excluded from home
ownership, a significant wealth-building
opportunity. Redlining is outlawed in
1968, but the effects of these racist
policies continue to exist today.
1932
Oakland
adopts its
first tree
protection
ordinance.
Introduction | 31
c Joaquin Miller’s house (the Abbey) then and now.
Credit (Left): Oakland Public Library
A Brief History of the City of Oakland
c Engraving title “The Oaks of Oakland”
from: Bryant, William Cullen. Ed. (1874).
Picturesque America, or the Land We
Live In. Cassell, Petter, Galpin & Co.
1934
15,000 public
trees are planted
through the
Works Progress
Administration
(WPA).
1939–1945
Federal funding used
for tree planting in
Oakland is no longer
available due to
World War II.
1940
The adoption of the
“Official Tree Designation
List” results in the removal
(or proposed removal) of
many large trees that are
not recognized as “official
trees” in order “to facilitate
street tree maintenance”
(Oakland Tribune,
April 1, 1940).
1950s
City led tree planting
efforts predominantly
exclude the Black
neighborhoods of North
and West Oakland.
Oakland derived its name from the
abundance of coast live oak trees that once
dominated the landscape. Father Juan Crespí, an
early Spanish explorer, described the area as "Llanura de Robles" or "plain of oaks" on a map during an expedition in 1772 with Juan Fages.3 When the State Legislature
incorporated the City of Oakland in 1852, State Senator Don Mariano Guadalupe de Vallejo referred to the land as "Encinal del Temescal," meaning "the oak grove near the sweat lodge" (referring to the sweat lodge present in the area that is now Lake Temescal). 9,10 Initially, Oakland was a small area west of Lake Merritt, strategically chosen for its coastal location on the interior of the San Francisco Bay, which made it an ideal port. Over time, Oakland gradually expanded as neighboring townships were annexed.
32 | Section One
Once a small town, now a bustling
and diverse metropolis. Oakland remained
a small community of 1,500 people into the
1860s, when its population began to boom. In
1869, Oakland was chosen as the western end
of the Transcontinental Railroad and by 1870 the
population had grown to 10,500 people. The city
and population continued to grow as the Port of
Oakland developed and grew in the late 1800s and
Oakland International Airport was created in the
early 20th century. These modes of transportation
helped define Oakland as a hub of industry and
commerce, inspiring continued growth and
attracting manufacturing business.
African Americans moved to Oakland, many from
the Jim Crow South (the “Great Migration”), during
the early and mid-1900s, due in part to the job
opportunities available in Oakland’s railroads,
shipyards, and war-related and manufacturing
industries. Some of the earliest residents settled
here because the Pullman’s Palace Car Company
had a policy to hire African Americans as porters
for their railroad cars, creating a large African
American population in Oakland starting in the
1870s. The construction of railroads brought
Chinese immigrants, who resided in the area that
is presently Jack London Square and along the bay
in West Oakland. Many Europeans immigrated to
Oakland during the last 1800s and early 1900s to
various parts of Oakland as well. The earliest being
Irish in West Oakland, Germans in Fruitvale, and
Italians in Temescal.9
FRUIT TREES IN OAKLAND
The mild Mediterranean
climate and fertile soil make
Oakland an ideal location
for fruit cultivation.
Fruit crops, including
apples, pears, and
cherries, were
among the first
to be grown in
the area.
Today, front and
backyards easily grow
a wide variety of fruit
trees from around
the world.
c E 14th St (International Blvd) in Fruitvale,
circa 1910. Credit: Oakland Public Library
1957
Cypress Street Viaduct (part of Interstate
880) is constructed through the middle of
Oakland’s African American community,
creating an economic disadvantage
by separating it from downtown and
disrupting its unity. Many homes
and businesses in the community are
demolished to make the construction
possible (City of Oakland, Brisbane
and Lippman).
1960s
Urban renewal projects, like BART
and the Main Post Office, continue
to affect marginalized communities
in Oakland. Many African American
and Latino families in West Oakland
are displaced as a result (City of
Oakland). No African Americans are
hired to work on the construction
of either the Post Office or BART
(Rothstein, 2017, pp. 168-169).
Introduction | 33
1970–1973
The City of Oakland participates in
the federal “Model Cities” program
and plants 2,000 trees in West
Oakland without the involvement
of the community. Every tree is
removed by residents (Tarver,
2015, p. 58 & 91).
By the 1960s, the city had
one of the largest African
American populations
in the country. In the
1960s and 1970s, Asian
and Latinx immigrants,
particularly from Mexico,
Central America, and the
Philippines moved to
Oakland. They settled
in neighborhoods
throughout the city
and brought their
cultures, languages, and
traditions. Oakland also
became home to a large
and diverse population
of people with disabilities, who brought their own
unique cultures and perspectives to the city.
The cultural shifts in Oakland’s population played
a significant role in shaping Oakland’s history in
the Civil Rights and disability rights movements
and contributed to Oakland’s vibrant cultural
diversity. These many groups have created a
cultural richness that has made Oakland a more
inclusive and welcoming city
for everyone.
1972
Fuel breaks are
created due to concern
of freeze-impacted
eucalyptus trees in the
Oakland Hills.
1978
Proposition
13 is passed,
severely
limiting the
tax income
California cities
receive.
1978–1979
A tree
inventory is
conducted of
all existing
trees within
Community
Development
Districts. The
inventory
shows that
70% of
districts lack
street trees.
1978–1984
The Oakland
Tree Task Force
and Oakland
Neighborhood Tree
Organizing Program
(ONTOP) initiates
community tree
planting programs
in West and North
Oakland.
1980s
The “green the
flatlands” initiative
leads to the planting
of more than 7,000
trees over a ten-year
period with a goal
to distribute the
canopy equally across
Oaklands’ flatlands.
c First sawmill in Oakland on Palo Seco Creek near
Dimond Canyon, circa 1880. Credit: Oakland
Public Library
d May 7, 1977: Discrimination against people with
disabilities is barred in all buildings and facilities
receiving federal funding.
Oakland’s changing landscape.
From the early days, the expanding city was a
threat to the oak groves Oakland was named
after and most were cleared away in the name of
progress. The redwood population in the hills had
already been decimated by this time because of the
need for wood for the building (and rebuilding) of
San Francisco, Oakland, and other cities starting in
the mid-1800s.9,12,13, 14
34 | Section One
The flatlands were built out
rapidly, first for railroad,
shipping, and wartime workers,
and then returning veterans
and their families. The speed of
growth combined with redlining
created relatively
compact neighborhoods
dominated by concrete and little
to no tree canopy cover.
Images from the early 1900s
show the East Bay hills as
primarily tree-less but were
soon planted with blue
gum eucalyptus (Eucalyptus
globulus), Monterey pine (Pinus
radiata), and Monterey cypress
(Hesperocyparis macrocarpa) by
Joaquin Miller, California’s first
poet laureate who owned land
in the hills that includes today’s
Joaquin Miller Park. Between
1910-1913, real estate developer
Frank C. Havens planted 8
million blue gum eucalyptus in
the Oakland and Berkeley Hills
with the intentions of producing
a quick source of lumber.13
1981
GREENSTREETS: The
Street Tree Plan for
Oakland
It establishes
is published.
“GREENSTREETS,” the
official street tree
coordination center,
to implement and
monitor the Street
Tree Plan.
1984
Central District Street
Tree Study is published
by the Oakland Planning
and Park Services
Departments, which
establishes design
standards and guidelines
for street tree selection
for major streets and
neighborhood streets.
c Eucalyptus groves are common in Oakland Hills.
Unfortunately, this species of eucalyptus is not suitable for lumber and the groves were abandoned. Without active management, blue gum eucalyptus soon naturalized in the landscape.
7 Hundreds of thousands
of non-native trees were planted in the Oakland Hills by other real estate developers to make the area more appealing. Today, many of these trees have reached maturity, creating a human-made forest landscape, that is home to the majority of Oakland’s overall tree canopy. 1986
Oakland becomes
a Tree City USA®
— a status it has
maintained for 35
years and counting.
1990
The Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) is passed to ensure that people
with disabilities have equal access to
all areas of public life, including safe
and accessible access to the sidewalk
and public rights of way.
Introduction | 35
1991
The Tunnel Fire
burns 1,520 acres
in the Oakland Hills,
including over 3,000
residences. The fire
reduces Oakland’s
tree canopy from
21% to 19%.
1992
Oakland’s first
Vegetation
Management Plan is
adopted to reduce
fire fuel loads and
minimize wildfire
hazards.
1996
The City of Oakland Open
Space Conservation and
Recreation: An Element of
the Oakland General Plan
(“OSCAR”) is published and
includes goals to improve
the care of street trees and
to prioritize tree planting in
neighborhoods with the highest
priority for street trees.
1998
Urban Releaf, a
community-led, urban
forestry non-profit
organization is founded
by Kemba Shakur. It
has planted more than
15,000 trees in underserved neighborhoods
around the East Bay.
Tree-lined streets and forested hilltop vistas
overlooking the San Francisco Bay are a big part
of Oakland’s appeal. They give the city character,
beauty, identity, and set it apart from other
cities in the Bay Area. Oakland is the only major
metropolitan city with real redwood forests
(second growth). In a 20-minute (or less) car ride
northeast from downtown, the landscape changes
dramatically from urban to forested and rustic.
The northern perimeter of the City is lined with a
regional park system of forests including native
(and non-native) plants, hills, streams, and miles of
hiking trails.
c View of East Oakland from the Oakland Hills.
36 | Section One
1998
The Street Tree Management Plan
is developed to revise tree policies
and reduce costs. Goals include
maximizing the lifespan of park
and city trees, planting a diverse
palette of trees, planting large trees
wherever possible, maintaining
trees, encouraging active
participation in all aspects of the tree
program, and increasing the total
inventory of “official” street trees.
2007–2009
The Great Recession
reduces already limited
city budgets across the
country and beyond.
Urban forestry budgets
are cut in many cities,
including Oakland.
2013
The West Oakland
Reforestation Plan is
published by the West
Oakland Green Initiative
(WOGI) to support
increased planting and
maintenance of trees in
West Oakland.
2015
Oakland launches the
Department of Race
and Equity, becoming
the first department
of its kind in any city in
California (Bordne and
Johnson, 2020).
Oakland today, a city
of vibrant culture
and natural beauty
contrasted by inequities.
Home to major economic and
cultural institutions and a
population of just over 440,600
residents (2020 U.S. Census),
Oakland today is a significant
global contributor to innovation,
music, and art. Its proximity to
San Francisco, Silicon Valley, and
the growing regional technology
industry has led to economic
opportunity as well as increased
population and demand for
real estate. The San Francisco –
Oakland – Hayward metropolitan
area is considered to have one
of the highest costs of living in
the United States. This has led to
inequity among Oaklanders who
benefit from these opportunities.
The Oakland’s BIPOC
communities are
disproportionally impacted by
these inequities and quality of
life issues, many of which stem
from a history of discriminatory
practices (redlining) in city politics
and real estate.
c Murals are used for artistic expression and activism in Oakland.
Introduction | 37
TREES AS INSPIRATION
Trees have long been a symbol of nature’s beauty and resilience. Their majesty has inspired artists in Oakland and beyond to create works of art that capture their essence.
Visual Art. Trees have been a popular subject
for paintings, sculpture, and photography
throughout history. They have been depicted
in a wide range of styles, from realistic to
abstract. Famous examples include Diego
Rivera’s Symbolic Landscape, Vincent van
Gogh's The Olive Trees, Gustav Klimt's The Birch
Forest, Maya Lin's What is Missing?,
Andy Goldsworthy's Tree Fall, Ansel Adams'
Autumn, Yosemite National Park, David
Hockney's A Bigger Splash, and Ali Shokri’s The
Passion of Trees.
Music: Trees have been featured in a
wide range of songs and compositions,
including Fantastic Negrito’s “Root
City,” a song about Oakland, and Joni
Mitchell’s “Big Yellow Taxi,” an activist song
referencing tree preservation. Trees have
also been represented in music through
the use of instruments made from wood,
such as guitars and drums.
2018
Oakland Equity Indicators Report
is released and used as a guide
for addressing disparities in the
community. Oakland received
grant funding from the California
Department of Forestry & Fire
Protection to perform a street tree
inventory, plant 700 trees, and
write the Urban Forest Plan.
2020
Oakland adopts the
Equitable Climate
Action Plan (ECAP) that
establishes goals and
actions to equitably
mitigate and adapt to
Oakland’s changing
climate.
2024
Oakland’s Urban
Forest Plan is
completed,
providing a path
forward for effective
management of the
City’s trees for the
next fifty years.
Trees as art themselves. Tree pruning and
growing techniques can also be an art
form, such as Pearl Fryar’s abstract topiary
garden in Bishopville, South Carolina,
and Axel Erlandson’s “circus” trees at the
Gilroy Gardens in Gilroy, California. Urban
wood reutilization and live-edge tree
furniture are examples of incorporating
the natural beauty of trees into furniture
and everyday items.
c Self portrait by Dr. Ayodele Nzinga.
38 | Section One
c "Anima" at Yerba
Buena Center of the Arts.
Credit: My-Linh Le
c Oakland Autumn Lights Festival in the Gardens of
Lake Merritt.
i have known trees
Dr. Ayodele Nzinga
i have known trees
they mark the trails I took
some i planted
others i cared for
some i dreamed upon
some pointed the way
the eucalyptus in the morning
in the low rolling hills
old hills sliding down on themselves
high thistle grass & the smell of tall
trees
close your eyes and breathe
acorns under foot like
children often are in
a community of oaks
remembering the power
in small things we breathe
lottie’s bell tree
ripped out af ter replanted
under the weeping willow
by a gardener with no dirt
the willow weeps still
the fig tree the gardener
inherited nursed to bear
& was forced to leave
those in rented rooms
only have rented trees
the avocado tree in
the nun’s backyard where
trees became a stage
& the gardener dreamed of roots
while learning to sow seeds
lemon trees in pots
dreaming of dirt
sweet smell on the porch
breathe though transitions
trees travel with me
the apple tree bird feeder
stalked by feral cats
g reen hard apples
turn red if birds let them
whose tree is this
the orange tree
the feral cats
were birthed beneath
in the hole dog dug
odd shaped oranges no one eats
magnolia trees
victorian houses
west Oakland sings
the south f luffy blooms
feed the wind
loquat trees
behind fences
sweet meat if you know
like the fruit remembered
in eucalyptus summers
Immersive Art: Trees are
used to create immersive
art, such as Deanna Van
Buren’s and Ayodele
Nzinga’s Soul Tree Forest,
and My-Linh Le and Alex
Abalos’ Anima which
were featured at the
Yerba Buena Center of
the Arts “dreamseeds”
exhibit in 2022. Oakland
Autumn Lights Festival
is an annual event at the
Gardens of Lake Merritt
where hundreds of artists
reinterpret trees and
plants with lights and
structures. The 2021 exhibit
“Palm Reflections” used
the electricity created by
palm trees to generate
ambient music and lights.
Poetry and Literature. Trees have inspired countless
works of writing over the years; well-known
examples include Shel Silverstein’s The Giving Tree,
and Maya Angelou’s “When a Tree Falls.” Many
authors have found inspiration from adventures in
nature, including Jack London, author of The Call
of the Wild and White Fang, and Joaquin Miller,
California’s first Poet Laureate. The California
Writer’s Club, founded in Oakland in 1903, was
instrumental in purchasing the land for the creation
of Joaquin Miller Park, which continues to attract
and inspire authors for over 100 years.
Introduction | 39
FOR THE LOVE
OF TREES
Why do we love trees? Let us count the ways.
• Cultural Symbolism. Trees are an important part
of many people’s heritage and can connect them to
their history, religion, and traditions. Trees symbolize peace, strength, resilience, history, and family and
are linked to longstanding traditions and holidays,
like the Tree of Knowledge, Christmas Tree, Bodhi
Tree, Celtic Tree of Life, and Tu B’Shvat (ט‘‘ו טבשב(.
• In Oakland, the oak tree, often depicted with its
strong expansive roots, is the symbol of the City’s
many virtues. It is often used by businesses, sports
teams, and artists to represent their connection with
and pride for Oakland.
• Food Source. Trees have been an important source
of food for humans for thousands of years. Fruits,
acorns, and other nuts have provided sustenance for
generations.
• Sense of Place. Trees create a feeling of being
connected to something beyond the man-made
structures and constructs of our daily lives. As one
writer put it, "Nature is not simply a luxury – or
something to do once a year on a vacation – but an
essential element of our ability to thrive on a daily
basis as humans." (Gruber, as cited in O’Hare, 2019)
• Connection to Nature and Outdoors. Trees and forests provide a peaceful retreat from the stresses of daily life and can help reduce anxiety and promote feelings of calm and well-being. The Japanese practice of Shinrin-Yoku, or forest bathing, involves engaging the senses with the forest to connect with the natural world and improve health.
• Health. Research shows that exposure to trees and nature has positive effects on human health, including relaxation, lowering blood pressure, improving sleep and mood, boosting immunity, supporting mental health, and reducing the need for some medications. • Emotional Connection. People feel a strong emotional connection to trees, which can inspire them to take action to protect and preserve them.
It is important to recognize that the benefits of trees have been known and regarded by Indigenous peoples for thousands of years and much can be learned from their wisdom, cultures, and respect for nature.
c The iconic oak tree logo re-imagined as
street art, artist unknown.
40 | Section One
Addressing Inequities in Oakland
In 2022, Oakland declared racism a public health
crisis. Due to a citywide focus on this issue, equity
is now a cornerstone of all Oakland’s plans and
processes, including Oakland’s Equitable Climate
Action Plan (ECAP, adopted 2020), the General Plan
2045 update, and this Urban Forest Plan.
Oakland community members have taken
ownership of planning processes to improve their
neighborhoods, especially those hardest hit by
environmental pollution and a historic lack of
investment due to discriminatory practices. The
Urban Forest Plan aims to build from community
voices with a focus on growing Oakland’s urban
forest and addressing inequities. Section Two
describes the equity-based approach used in
developing this Plan.
In 2015, the City of Oakland established the
Department of Race & Equity (Race & Equity) with
a mission to “create a city where diversity has
been maintained, racial disparities have been
eliminated, and racial equity has been achieved.”
The Department’s goals include:
• “Eliminate systemic causes of racial disparities in
City Government.”
• “Promote inclusion and full participation for all
residents of the City.”
• “Reduce race-based disparities in our
communities.”
Race & Equity trains Oakland City staff on the
causes and effects of systemic racism and provides
tools, educational resources, and programming to
address them.
COMMUNITY-LED PLANNING EFFORTS TO
BUILD RESILIENCE & IMPROVE NEIGHBORHOOD
ENVIRONMENTS
The East Oakland Neighborhoods
Initiative (EONI) and the West
Oakland Community Action Plan
(WOCAP) address environmental
justice disparities and include
strategies for using trees and
landscapes as pollution buffering,
beautification, and job creation
strategies.
In 2013, the West Oakland Green
Initiative produced The West
Oakland Reforestation Plan to
improve environmental conditions
in West Oakland by planting more
street trees.
c Fall street tree planting at Bridges Academy with
students and City staff.
Introduction | 41
The Benefits of Trees
For hundreds of thousands of years, humans have enjoyed the benefits of food, shelter, fuel, medicine, and other resources that trees provide. In urban areas like Oakland, landscapes are defined by concrete, asphalt, buildings, and other hard surfaces that reflect heat and do not absorb water. The proper selection, planting, and care of trees following arboricultural best practices make cities more livable.
TREES CLEAN
THE AIR.
Trees improve air quality by
absorbing carbon dioxide (a
greenhouse gas), releasing oxygen
into the atmosphere, and filtering out pollutants
such as ozone, dust, ash, pollen, and smoke from
the air we breathe. This has a positive impact
on public health, as poor air quality can lead to
respiratory issues and other health problems.
Particulate matter from fossil fuel-powered
vehicles and other pollution sources poses one
of the highest health risks to people, especially
those who live near centers of industry or along
freeway corridors.
15 In Oakland, there are fewer
trees along the Interstate 880 corridor, which
has the highest concentration of pollutants in
Oakland, disproportionately affecting the frontline
community residents who live in the area.16
Research has found that by intercepting particulate
matter, trees save over 850 lives and prevent
670,000 incidents of acute respiratory symptoms
in the United States each year.17
TREES COOL
THE CITY.
Large, healthy trees help lower hot
summer temperatures through
shading and transpiration. Shading
reduces summer temperatures beneath trees by 2
to 9°F, while transpiration reduces air temperature
as water evaporates from leaf pores. 18,19 Trees
have been shown to prevent 1,200 heat-related
deaths each year in the U.S.
20 The 2030 Equitable Climate Action Plan
(ECAP) identified increasing temperatures
and extreme heat as community hazards in
Oakland. The Bay Area has experienced a 1.7°F
increase in temperature between 1950 and 2005.
Temperatures are projected to increase another
3.3°F by mid-century.21 With 53.8% of Oakland’s
land covered by hard surfaces like roads and
buildings, urban heat island impacts from these
temperature increases can be significant. An urban
heat island happens when the buildings, roads,
and concrete soak up the sun’s heat during the day
c Looking up at a cork oak in Mosswood
Park. Credit: Kerstin Firmin
42 | Section One
OAKLAND’S CLIMATE
RISKS: EQUITABLE
CLIMATE ACTION PLAN
As a result of the climate crisis,
Oakland is already facing several
challenges that are increasing over
time, including:
• Extreme Heat
• Changes in Precipitation
• Wildfire
• Sea Level Rise
Extreme heat and heat island
effect identified in Oakland’s Local
Hazard Mitigation Plan (2021) and
Equitable Climate Action Plan
(2020) are critical hazards that
Oakland needs to plan for
and mitigate.
Planting climate-appropriate
trees and caring for them and
established trees are crucial
tools in mitigating the impacts of
these climate risks, particularly in
Oakland’s frontline communities
that are most susceptible to the
effects of climate change.
and release it slowly at night, making the city hotter
than surrounding areas that have more trees and
greenspace. Hot days lead to warmer nights, where
temperatures do not fall below 75°F. Warm nights
do not allow buildings and paved surfaces to cool off
as quickly after hot days and can increase the risk of
heat-related illnesses in city residents.22 Heat-related illnesses cause more deaths in the United States
each year than any other weather event, including
hurricanes, lightning, tornadoes, and floods.23 For every 1°F increase in temperature during a heat wave, there
is a 2.5% increase in the risk of heat-related mortality, in addition to respiratory difficulties, heat stroke, or exacerbation of existing chronic health problems.24,25, Many homes in Oakland do not have air conditioning
or adequate insulation, especially in frontline
communities. More tree canopy cover and green
spaces in areas where people live and work can help
address issues of "heat equity" and provide relief to
those who are most at risk during heat waves.26
WELL-MAINTAINED
TREES INCREASE
SAFETY AND
COMMUNITY.
Trees have been shown to enhance
neighborhoods by increasing actual safety, providing
an overall sense of safety, and strengthening
ties between neighbors.27 A 10% increase in
neighborhood tree canopy cover has been
associated with a 12 to 15% reduction in violent and
property crimes.28,29 Trees growing along streets also
help slow traffic, making streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists.30,31,
In contrast, unmaintained trees block street lighting
and pedestrian sightlines, causing people to feel less
safe in their neighborhoods.32 Unmaintained trees can
also create hazards for people with mobility needs and
visual impairments. Regular maintenance of city trees
will improve public safety and help ensure streets and
sidewalks are accessible.
c Heat Vulnerability Index is too
often a map of income and race
demographics. Credit: Alameda
County, California
Introduction | 43
TREES IMPROVE
WATER QUALITY
AND REDUCE
FLOODING.
Existing stormwater management
systems are not always adequate to accommodate
runoff, especially during heavy rains, such as
those during the winter of 2022-2023. When
a system is overloaded, stormwater may back
up and cause flooding. Trees help prevent
this backup by intercepting rainfall in their
canopies, which reduces intensity of rainfall and
runoff at ground level. Underground, tree root
growth and decomposition create spaces in the
soil that help increase the amount of water that
the soil can store, allowing for greater absorption
of rain.33 Intercepted rainfall evaporating from
leaves or slowly soaking into the ground reduces
stormwater runoff and pollutants by 20-60%.
As heavy rain events in Oakland are predicted to
increase in frequency and severity due to climate
change, Oakland’s ECAP identifies trees and green
infrastructure as an adaptation strategy (A-6) for
mitigating stormwater runoff. 34
TREES MITIGATE
CLIMATE CHANGE.
Trees reduce greenhouse gases
that can trap and retain heat in
the atmosphere and cause the
city to get warmer. Carbon dioxide is absorbed
(sequestered) in tree trunks, branches, leaves, and
roots during photosynthesis. The amount of carbon
that can be stored by a tree is directly related to its size. Larger trees store more carbon.
Proper investments in tree planting, care, and
preservation can ensure that Oakland’s trees
reach maturity, when they are most effective at
greenhouse gas capture. Oakland’s urban forest
sequesters 13,280 tons of carbon each year,
which is equivalent to the amount of carbon
dioxide emitted each year by 3,018 gasolinepowered cars in Oakland. This benefit can help advance Oakland’s goal to become carbon neutral
by 2045 and supports the ECAP’s carbon removal
(sequestration) goal through the protection and
expansion of tree canopy cover (CR-2).
c Tree lined streets can reduce summer temperatures by 2-9 degrees F. 44 | Section One
TREES SUPPORT
WILDLIFE.
Trees provide critical wildlife
habitat for birds, mammals,
reptiles, insects, fish, and other
aquatic species. For birds in particular, the City’s
trees play a vital role. The Bay Area is home to a
variety of bird species, including California quail,
hummingbirds, woodpeckers, peewee, and
nuthatches that use trees for nesting, food, and
cover.35 Oakland is located within the Pacific Flyway
for migrating birds providing nesting, feeding, and
stopover points for a variety of native bird species.
Tree flowers provide pollen and nectar to hundreds
of species of native bees and other pollinators,
and canopies provide both food and shelter to a
variety of wildlife, increasing the biodiversity of the urban forest. Wildlife can help manage insect pests,
remove carrion, and disperse seeds. Trees can help
meet the ECAP Action A-6 to “expand and protect
green infrastructure and biodiversity.”
TREES IMPROVE
HUMAN HEALTH.
Trees are an important tool in
reducing stressors that impact
vulnerable populations (such as
heat, poor air quality, and flooding) and helping
to build adaptive capacity. People who live in
neighborhoods with more tree canopy cover
have better overall health, including lower rates
of obesity, more social cohesion, less stress, and
lower blood pressure.36,37, In one study, the number
of residents who reported poor mental health
decreased 63% within 18 months after vacant
lots near their homes were planted with grass
and trees.
RESILIENCY IN
COMMUNITIES AFTER
STRESS AND TRAUMA
(ReCAST)
“Nature-based interventions, which
includes interaction with trees, are
underutilized as a mental health strategy
despite abundant research demonstrating
the beneficial effects of nature on our
cognitive, emotional, spiritual, and physical
wellbeing. Because of the role nature
plays in healing, the City of Oakland’s
Human Services Department incorporates
ecotherapy in its implementation of the
U.S. Department of Health’s Substance
Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration’s ReCAST program. The
Human Services Department understands
that providing opportunities for city staff
and community members to engage
with ecotherapy modalities deepens
participants’ connection with nature and
can be replicated frontline communities as
a relatively easy and cost-effective mental
health intervention.”
-Desralynn Cole, ReCAST Program
Director, Human Services Department
c A ReCast-sponsored ecotherapy retreat
in Joaquin Miller Park.
The black crowned
night heron is the
official bird of Oakland.
Introduction | 45
WHAT IS GREEN GENTRIFICATION?
While an increase in property values is a benefit of trees, it also has important equity implications. Increases in value positively impact property owners but can negatively impact renters in the form of increased rent prices. These increases can price out vulnerable residents and disrupt frontline communities (green gentrification).
To prevent “green gentrification,” the Urban Forest Plan calls for:
1. Proactive relationship-building between Oakland City departments, including Oakland Public Works, Planning and Building Department, the Department of Transportation, and the Department of Race & Equity.
2. Strengthening and developing partnerships with organizations in frontline communities to engage with residents in fair and culturally appropriate ways, such as the Black Cultural Zone, East Oakland Neighborhood Initiative, West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project, West Oakland Green Initiative, Trees for Oakland, Planting Justice, The Unity Council, and others.
To redress a legacy of displacement and
disenfranchisement of BIPOC communities,
it is vital that future planning programs
intentionally implement practices and
policies aimed to keep residents in their
neighborhoods. The implementation of
the Urban Forest Plan aims to ensure that
decision-making involves the priorities and
values of BIPOC communities.
The transit-oriented redevelopment of
the Fruitvale neighborhood is considered
a model of redevelopment without
displacement (Barreto, et al., 2018). Unlike
other redevelopment projects, the work
in Fruitvale was led by a local social equity
development non-profit (The Unity Council)
and did not displace existing cultural groups
or cause gentrification. Following a similar
approach for urban forestry can reduce
green gentrification.
c Street trees in Fruitvale Village.
Credit: Eric Fredericks
46 | Section One
Other studies demonstrate links between trees and
increased life expectancies. Evidence shows that
a person’s proximity to greenness reduces nongenetic factors that affect human aging, potentially increasing longevity. This study accounted for
different races and genders, finding that these
effects are more pronounced for BIPOC community
members living in disadvantaged communities.38
Trees are also linked to reductions in accidentrelated deaths, with larger, older trees showing a greater association, especially for men and people
aged 65 and older.39
Trees also improve human health by encouraging
physical activity. Residents are three times
more likely to be physically active when they
live in areas with high levels of trees and
vegetation.
40 Tree canopy’s ability to reduce
surface temperatures allows for more comfort
in walking, biking, and using public transit, and
increases the appeal of cycling routes. A top priority
of the ECAP is prioritizing investment in urban
forestry and green infrastructure to address
health disparities.41
TREES CAN LOWER
UTILITY BILLS.
By providing shade in the hot
summer months and windbreaks
in the winter, trees can make a
significant difference in building energy usage.
Properly placing three trees around a home can
reduce energy costs for the average household
by at least $100 to $250 per year, while shading air
conditioning units can help them run up to 10%
more efficiently.
The U.S. Department of Energy found that lowincome households spend three times more (nearly 9% of their household income) on energy bills,
compared to 3% of household income for non-lowincome households.42 Less electricity use also leads to fewer greenhouse gases emitted by power plants.
TREES INCREASE
PROPERTY VALUES
AND BUSINESS.
Mature, healthy trees can
increase property values for both
residential and commercial properties by an
average of 10%.43 A study in Riverside, California
found that the property value of a residential
lot adjacent to a preserved oak woodland was
17% higher than a property that was 1,000 feet
away from it. The preserved oak woodland also
increased the overall value of the community.44
Studies have shown that a healthy tree canopy
also increases business revenue. Shoppers spend
more time and money in shopping districts with
mature, healthy tree canopies and are willing
to spend 9-12% more for products, services,
and parking at businesses with trees in front of
them.45,46,
Oakland can reduce the possible negative effects
of increased property value on community
members through proper planning and
community engagement (see “What is Green
Gentrification” on page 46).
TREES PROVIDE
JOBS.
Tree planting, care, and
management activities in cities
require people to do the work,
so managing an urban forest effectively will
create job opportunities starting at entry level
to advanced managerial roles in both the public
and private sectors. Tree-related workforce
development programs such as the urban
arboriculture program at Merritt College serve to
train individuals for these jobs. Organizations like
the Tree Equity Workforce Network are increasing
equity by helping members of underrepresented
communities get these jobs.47
Introduction | 47
Section Two
An EquityCentered
Approach
Oakland is a city with a diverse history, but, unfortunately, racism and discriminatory practices have resulted in racial divides. Despite being consistently ranked as one of the top ten most ethnically diverse cities in the United States, BIPOC community members continue to have less access to opportunities than their white counterparts due to historical discrimination in housing and neighborhood planning. 48,49 The lack of trees and greenspace is as much of an
environmental injustice as the air pollution that
plagues frontline communities.52
The City of Oakland took proactive steps to center
equity in the Urban Forest Plan by setting goals,
strategies, and actions to address these disparities
in ways that will benefit all residents. To center
equity in the Plan, it was necessary to engage in
thoughtful and reflective processes to ensure that
the voices of frontline communities were heard,
acknowledged, and integrated into it. This section
describes the process and what was heard.
The geographic and racial disparities in Oakland
are mirrored in the distribution of tree canopy
cover. Wealthy, historically white neighborhoods
boast forested hills and tree-lined streets, while
frontline communities like West and East Oakland
have minimal tree cover and few trees along their
streets. While trees provide physical, mental,
and social health benefits for urban residents,
these benefits are not equitably distributed.
Frontline community residents have limited access
to trees and the benefits they provide, perpetuating
environmental injustice in these communities. 50,51
c International Boulevard (East Oakland) lacks tree canopy.
An Equity-Centered Approach | 49
A Legacy of Community Tree
Stewardship
Oakland has a long history of community involvement in the planting and care of its urban forest. The following is an incomplete history of known citizen action in urban forestry:
• During the City Beautiful Movement of the
early 1900s to 1920s, many streets and parks,
such as Lakeside Park, DeFremery Park, and
Raimondi Park (then called Bayview Park),
were planted with oaks, redwoods, and a
variety of other trees.
• The Oakland Parks Commission was
established in 1909 and planted oaks in
Lakeside Park. 53
• Between 1978 and 1985, the Oakland Tree
Task Force (OTTF) collaborated with the
Oakland Citizens Committee for Urban
Renewal (OCCUR) to initiate public tree
planting programs in West and North
Oakland. The program evolved into the
Oakland Neighborhood Tree Organizing
Program (ONTOP), which planted 15,000
to 16,000 trees in public spaces, primarily
in West and North Oakland. ONTOP was
instrumental in developing the citywide
tree planting plan for Oakland, called
GREENSTREETS, in 1981.
c Volunteers plant trees on Martin Luther King
Jr. Day to honor his legacy of service.
Credit: CAL FIRE
50 | Section Two
• Since the early 1990s, numerous non-profit
organizations and community groups have
taken the initiative to plant trees in Oakland's
streets, schools, and parks. These groups have
used a variety of funding sources, including
federal and state grants, to carry out their
efforts. One such non-profit is Urban Releaf,
which began in 1998 with the aim of planting
trees to beautify frontline communities and
provide job training for young people in these
neighborhoods.54
The local chapter of the Sierra Club has also
planted trees in public spaces, particularly
in frontline communities, and formed a
new group called Trees for Oakland that
is affiliated with the Oakland Parks and
Recreation Foundation (OPRF). Trees
for Oakland and OPRF plant street trees
and provides support for City-led tree
planting and tree care efforts, including the
"Better Neighborhoods, Same Neighbors"
Transformative Climate Communities project.
Other non-profits and community groups
actively plant trees in public parks,
schoolyards, and on private property, such
as Common Vision and Planting Justice.
Neighbors also organize to plant trees
on public and private property in their
neighborhoods.
• Many community groups have incorporated
strategic tree planting goals into their
community plans. The West Oakland
Environmental Indicators Project and East
Oakland Neighborhoods Initiative call for
strategic planting of trees to improve air
quality, sequester carbon, and beautify
communities.
• The Oakland Urban Forestry Forum (OUFF)
is a collaboration between community
members, non-profits, City staff, and
State agency representatives. The forum,
established in 2011 with the assistance of CAL
FIRE, is focused on promoting tree canopy
equity, partnerships, and public education
related to trees. Members of OUFF advocate
for investment in Oakland's urban forest and
have contributed to City planning efforts.
c Urban Releaf and CAL FIRE partnered
for many years to plant trees throughout
Oakland's frontline communities. Credit:
CAL FIRE
An Equity-Centered Approach | 51
UNDERSTANDING INEQUITY
IN OAKLAND
Over the decades, racist programs and
policies exacerbated inequities in Oakland,
including:
Real Estate Redlining. Redlining is a
discriminatory real estate practice in
the U.S. where certain neighborhoods
were denied financial services, including
mortgages, based on their racial or ethnic
composition. The term “redlining” comes
from the practice of drawing a red line
on a map to indicate areas where these
financial services were not available. The
practice dates back to the 1930s when the
Federal Housing Administration (FHA)
developed underwriting guidelines that
rated neighborhoods on perceived stability
and desirability, with less stable and
desirable neighborhoods being redlined
on different maps created by both the FHA
and the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation
(Rose, 2022). The practice disproportionately
affected African Americans and other nonwhite people and led to the segregation of neighborhoods, racially focused slums, and
denied credit and other financial services
to people living in redlined neighborhoods.
Although redlining was officially banned in
1968, the legacy continues to be felt today,
with redlined neighborhoods experiencing
higher levels of poverty, lower levels of
homeownership, and reduced tree canopy.
Urban Renewal. Urban renewal is a policy
and practice that seeks to revitalize and
redevelop urban areas that are perceived as
being in decline or decay. In Oakland, the
policy dates back to the 1950s and 60s, when
projects like the Oakland-Alameda County
Coliseum were built on predominantly
African American and working-class
land, displacing residents. Highways and
freeways were also constructed, demolishing
homes and businesses in West Oakland,
including Interstate 880 which separated
HISTORIC REDLINING MAPS SET THOSE
DISCRIMINATORY PRACTICES THAT CREATED
THE FRONTLINE COMMUNITIES OF TODAY.
THERE ARE SIGNIFICANTLY FEWER TREES IN
FRONTLINE COMMUNITIES.
the neighborhood from downtown,
disrupting unity and creating an economic
disadvantage. This practice has continued
into recent years, leading to gentrification
and displacement of long-time residents and
sparking debates about the role of urban
renewal in Oakland's future.
Prohibiting Trucks on Route 580. The
Port of Oakland is a major hub for goods
transportation in Northern California,
responsible for moving 99% of cargo in the
area and serving a market of 14.5 million
consumers (Dara, 2021). However, due to
California State Law, truck traffic is not
only concentrated on Interstate 880 but
is banned from Interstate 580, leading
to more diesel particulate matter and a
disproportionate amount of air pollution in
communities surrounding the I-880
freeway. This air pollution has significant
negative impacts on the health and wellbeing of community members, particularly those who live, work, or attend school near
the freeway.
Council Districts
Grade Commercial
Grade A
Grade B
Grade C
Grade D
Areas Not Redlined
Redlining Areas
52 | Section Two
Vehicle emissions are a primary source of
air pollution on Oakland freeways, and the
negative health impacts of this pollution are
particularly pronounced among children
and older adults (Sæbø, 2017, p. 112). Exposure
to air pollution, including fine particulate
matter (PM2.5), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and
volatile organic compounds (VOCs), has
been linked to a range of health problems,
including respiratory and cardiovascular
diseases, cancer, and premature death
(WOEIP, 2019). In West Oakland, residents
Oakland before freeway construction on
top and after on bottom. The resulting
fragmentation of West Oakland created
significant environmental and social
inequities. Credit: Segregation by Design,
Adam Paul Susaneck, 2023
may inhale up to 100 cubic meters of PM2.5
in a single day, compared to the average of
10 cubic meters in most other areas (WOEIP,
2019). In addition to the health impacts, air
pollution has negative economic impacts on
the community, such as reduced property
values, decreased tourism, and higher
healthcare costs. The poor air quality can also
impact the quality of life in the community,
making it difficult for residents to enjoy
outdoor activities.
CONSEQUENCES OF
INEQUITY
As government and private actors have
created systems of discrimination and
treated social groups differently, providing
greater opportunity to some while placing
burdens on communities of colors, these
inequities have negative consequences,
including but not limited to:
• Disadvantaged and marginalized
communities. When equity is not
present, certain communities may
be disadvantaged and marginalized,
leading to a lack of access to resources
and opportunities. This creates a cycle
of poverty and disadvantage that is
challenging to break.
• Social unrest and conflict. When certain
communities are excluded or disadvantaged,
it can lead to social unrest and conflict, as
people are not being treated fairly. This can
create a sense of division and tension within
the community.
• Poor quality of life. When certain
communities are disadvantaged, it can lead
to a poor quality of life for those who live
there. This includes issues such as poor
housing, limited access to education and
healthcare, and high levels of crime and
violence.
An Equity-Centered Approach | 53
“A lack of participation in forestry programs by people living in [frontline] communities is highly problematic in relation to the goal of increasing canopy cover equity across the city.” 52
Urban Forest Plan Community
Engagement
The Urban Forest Plan’s community engagement process helped establish the community’s vision, ensuring the Plan’s goals, strategies, and actions are:
• Responsive to the needs and desires of the community. • Foster a sense of ownership among community
members.
• Create a more inclusive and just city for all. 55
However, the engagement process faced several
challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Those challenges led to deeper reflections about
strategies and approaches, eventually leading to
hiring community organizations to provide targeted
outreach to frontline communities, creating a project
website and survey, using the City of Oakland's social
media platforms, and leveraging local media interest
for broader outreach to residents and businesses
throughout Oakland. After a few false starts, community engagement began in spring 2022 with the help of four
engagement partners.
TREE PLANTING IN
OAKLAND’S FRONTLINE
COMMUNITIES
As part of the CAL FIRE grant that
supported development of the Urban
Forest Plan, 700 new trees were planted
in Oakland’s frontline communities.
Many of these trees were planted and
are being cared for with the help of
volunteers and community groups.
c Volunteers are critical in increasing
tree canopy cover in Oakland.
c Community members are eager for urban
forestry volunteer opportunities.
54 | Section Two
ENGAGEMENT PARTNERS
In 2021, the City of Oakland released a request for
proposals (RFP) to find community engagement
partners for the Urban Forest Plan who could assist
in reaching underrepresented frontline community
members. The goal was to integrate urban
forestry engagement into existing outreach
programs that community groups were already
conducting. These partners had the freedom to
design their own engagement activities in formats
and spaces that were authentic to them, within
budgets they determined. City of Oakland staff
provided educational resources and surveys for
them to collect community input, and provided
training and support as needed.
Four community groups with unique missions
and approaches submitted proposals and were
selected:
• Common Vision focuses on environment,
food, and education in underrepresented
communities, working through schools to
engage youth and the entire community.
• California Interfaith Power & Light
mobilizes individuals and communities
of faith and conscience to take action on
climate change across Oakland's diverse
demographics.
• Trees for Oakland with Oakland Parks
and Recreation Foundation plants and
maintains trees in the city, with a focus on
limited canopy areas, aiming to educate
people about trees, combat climate change,
and provide a more equitable distribution of
trees within Oakland.
• Forest & Tree provides outdoor learning
experiences to young people and their
families to develop a stronger sense of self,
community, and connection with the natural
world, working collaboratively with educators
and students to create personalized
curriculum and experiences.
“The empowering moment of [BIPOC]
residents seeing their voice matters
in how Oakland will forest their
community was also a highlight”
Common Vision
SUPPORTING WEST
AND EAST OAKLAND
NEIGHBORHOODS
The creation of the Urban Forest
Plan supports strategies outlined
in the West Oakland Community
Action Plan (WOCAP), which calls
for a comprehensive urban canopy
and vegetation plan. This plan aims
to identify suitable areas for planting
and maintaining trees, such as parks
and Caltrans' rights-of-way, and to
protect existing trees that mitigate
air pollution exposure in West
Oakland. Similarly, the East Oakland
Neighborhoods Initiative (EONI)
identified urban greening and tree
planting as one of its top ten priorities
for the region.
An Equity-Centered Approach | 55 An Equity-Centered Approach | 55
OBSERVATIONS, REFLECTIONS AND LESSONS LEARNED
FROM THE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT PROCESS
The Urban Forest Plan’s community survey received over 2,450 responses, which is a good response rate, however, this number alone does not accurately reflect the level of participation and engagement. Many questions were left unanswered, resulting in an average of 1,615 responses per question. Several factors may have contributed to this, including:
• Survey layout being difficult to read or manage on mobile devices. • Survey design not being able to differentiate between intentional and unintentional question skipping.
• Number of questions causing fatigue for respondents.
Although the engagement process aimed to target frontline and BIPOC communities, the response and feedback from community members in these groups was not as high as the Parks & Tree Services had hoped. Of the 1,124 people who responded to the race/ethnicity question, 416 identified as BIPOC.
Though turnout was not as high as originally hoped for, the Parks & Tree Services will use the lessons learned from this process to improve future community engagement efforts.
URBAN FOREST PLAN WEBSITE
An Urban Forest Plan website served as the central
hub for sharing educational materials with the
public. It contained various resources to inform
people about the current status of Oakland's Urban
Forest, including:
• A Timeline of Urban Forest Plan processes and
milestones.
• Oakland Tree Canopy and Land Cover
Assessment 2020, which summarized the
distribution of trees and tree canopy across
the community.
• Oakland Urban Forest Resource Analysis
2021, which provided information about the
species, composition, and benefits of the city’s
public trees.
• Oakland Urban Forest Council District
Summary and Supplemental Materials,
which summarized the findings of a study on
the relationship between tree canopy cover
and community characteristics (e.g., U.S.
Census Data, CalEnviroScreen, 500 cities).
The website included links to interactive
engagement tools to increase accessibility, such as:
• StoryMap, a digital mapping tool that allows
people to learn more about Oakland's urban
forest through a series of interactive maps.
• TreeKeeper Canopy, a planning tool for tree
planting and canopy expansion on both public
and private property.
• Pre-recorded presentation, a 20-minute
video summarizing the findings from the
Oakland Tree Canopy and Land Cover
Assessment and Oakland Urban Forest
Resource Analysis.
Community engagement partners received training
on how to use these materials during engagement
and a handbook for reference.
56 | Section Two
COMMUNITY SURVEY
A 50-question community survey posted on the
Urban Forest Plan website collected Oaklander’s
thoughts on their community priorities, issues,
and opportunities related to Oakland’s trees and
urban forest.
To increase the reach of the survey, the City’s
website and social media platforms, such as
Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Nextdoor,
advertised the call for engagement. Postcards with
QR codes provided easy access to the online survey
through mobile devices. The Google Translate
function on the project website allowed the survey
to be translated into many languages to improve
accessibility. Additionally, community engagement
partners distributed paper versions of the survey in
English, Spanish, and Chinese at events.
The survey period remained open from April to
August 2022 and received over 2,450 submissions.
ENGAGING THE OAKLAND
COMMUNITY
The engagement partner organizations in
collaboration with the City of Oakland’s Department
of Race & Equity and Parks & Tree Division, utilized
various in-person and virtual events and methods
to engage with frontline communities about the
Urban Forest Plan, the community survey, and
the importance of their voices in the planning
process. While outreach activities occurred in
all seven Council Districts, there was a focus on
engagement in Council Districts 3 and 5 based on
the Engagement Partners’ established networks.
These Districts include frontline communities
specifically aimed to reach in the engagement
process. The City reached out to community groups
representing frontline communities in other
Council Districts to attempt to fill the gap. Outreach
events included:
• Prescott School and King Elementary School
work parties
• Oakland Tech High School
• West Oakland Environmental Indicators
Project (WOEIP) meeting
• Mama Wanda Good Eggs Family Challenge
• SPRAC Health & Wellness Fair
• Community Circle at Peralta Hacienda
• ASCEND School
• Virtual meetings
• Email blasts, social media posts, and
newsletters
An Equity-Centered Approach | 57
What Did We Hear from the
Community?
Reasons people like trees:
1. Add beauty to the neighborhood
2. Benefit birds, wildlife, and ecosystems
3. Clean the air
4. Create shade
5. Capture carbon dioxide
6. Provide mental, spiritual and cultural benefits
7. Reduce traffic noise
8. Reduce crime
9. Improve local water quality
2,484 Survey Respondents1
95% live in Oakland
Top community priorities:
1. Housing
2. Public Safety
3. Improved roads and infrastructure
4. Clean air and water
5. Trash and litter control
6. Better schools
7. Job creation/economic opportunities
81% notice the trees in their
community
78% wish there were more trees in
their community
1 * Note: Not all respondents answered all survey
questions
c A tree-shaded trail in the Oakland Hills.
Credit: Clifford Ham
c Joaquin Miller Park picnic area.
58 | Section Two
Top Challenges of Trees
1. Tree maintenance is a burden
2. Tree roots damaging sidewalks
3. Leaf litter
4. City does not take care of the trees
c The City of Oakland recognizes the importance
of interacting with nature from an early age.
Credit: Clara Petit. c American kestral hunting from
a tree. Credit: Bev Jo Von Dohre
c In major storms, unmaintained trees
have a greater chance of uprooting.
50% do not think the City of Oakland maintains its street and park trees. 92% do not think Oakland provides education to the community about trees and think the City should do more.
44% are aware that a City tree permit is needed to plant a street tree. 64% are aware that most trees growing in Oakland are protected by City ordinance.
For more detailed information on the engagement process and survey results, please see the Plan’s companion report Oakland Community Engagement Summary report.
An Equity-Centered Approach | 59
Community Urban Forest Concerns
and Priorities
1. THE CITY OF OAKLAND NEEDS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC TREE PLANTING
AND PRUNING SERVICES
The community is in favor of increasing tree planting but believes that the City of Oakland is not effectively planting and maintaining public trees. The Parks & Tree Division stopped proactively maintaining public trees in 2008, which has led to neglect, and trees being viewed as a burden. The community is urging the City to resume the planting and pruning of all street trees.
2. EMOTIONAL AND ECOSYSTEM BENEFITS OF TREES
People love trees for both emotional connections (such as beauty and mental, spiritual, and cultural benefits) and ecosystem services (such as clean air, shade, and clean water). Tree planting and management objectives need to focus on providing these benefits.
3. SUSTAINING THE URBAN FOREST FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS
The community takes a long-term view of Oakland’s urban forest. They want it to be better not just for today, but for future generations as well. Street trees can live for 50 or more years and grow over 40 feet tall, so ensuring sustainability requires significant planning and resources.
4. VOLUNTEERISM, GREEN JOB TRAINING, AND EDUCATION
The community is eager to support the urban forest through volunteering and green job training. They also want the City to provide education on tree planting and maintenance.
5. SOCIAL JUSTICE
The Oakland community believes that social justice should be considered when making decisions about the urban forest. To achieve this, the City needs to prioritize tree planting and maintenance in frontline communities and involve community members in the decision-making process.
6. TREE SPECIES
Oaklanders appreciate native trees for their beauty, symbolism, cultural significance, and history. However, urban development and climate change are dramatically changing the landscape and making it harder for native trees to grow and establish. Strategies that can address this priority include identifying appropriate locations to plant native trees to ensure they thrive and identifying native species from southern climates that may be suitable for Oakland’s warming climate (assisted migration).
7. MITIGATING SIDEWALK CONFLICTS AND TREE MAINTENANCE
To address community concerns, the City needs to facilitate repair of aging sidewalks, improve tree maintenance, and find solutions to mitigate sidewalk conflicts. This may involve revising the species planting list to better match trees to available soil space, reducing the chance of future sidewalk lifting by employing innovative sidewalk design and technology, and implementing strategies for mitigating existing sidewalk damage while ensuring ADAcompliant paths of travel (such as sidewalk shaving, bridging, permeable pavement, bumpouts, meandering sidewalks, etc.). 60 | Section Two
8. CITY POLICIES ON TREE PROTECTION AND PLANTING
Many people are not aware that Oakland has policies that protect trees and regulate the planting of new street trees. Increasing awareness about these policies to encourage compliance and maximize the health, quality, and size of the urban forest is a priority for the City.
9. PUBLIC SAFETY AND TREES
The community is very concerned about public safety. While trees can improve neighborhood cohesion, create a sense of place, and provide shade and cooling during hot weather, they can also block streetlights, traffic signals, obstruct accessible paths of travel, and obscure pedestrian sightlines. There is a strong community desire for the City to consider public safety when selecting tree species and planting locations, as well as conduct regular maintenance to ensure visibility and safety. c Volunteers expanding tree canopy near Lake Merritt. Credit: Kerstin Firmin An Equity-Centered Approach | 61
Section Three
Oakland’s
Urban Forest
Tree Canopy
21.5%
Pavement, stuctures, hard surfaces
(impervious)
53.8%
Grass,
vegetation, bare
soil (pervious)
22.4%
Water
2.3%
Oakland has 7,819 acres of tree
canopy cover, which is equivalent
to 5,923 football fields of trees!
To equitably and sustainably manage Oakland’s
urban forest, it is crucial to understand its current
conditions and management. The following
sections explore Oakland's urban forest data.
2018
Tree Canopy and
Land Cover
21.5% tree canopy (Figure 1, Map 1, 2018)
53.8% pavement, structures, and hard
surface (impervious surfaces)
22.4% grass, low lying vegetation, and bare
soil (pervious surfaces)
2.3% open water
URBAN TREE CANOPY
ASSESSMENT
An urban tree canopy (UTC) assessment
uses high-resolution aerial imagery to
map the location and amount of tree
canopy cover within a city, on both
public and private property. The term
"tree canopy" refers to the leaves,
branches, and woody plants that cover
the ground when viewed from above.
The information from a tree canopy
assessment can:
1. Identify areas that have low tree
canopy cover and prioritize them for
tree planting and care.
2. Develop a baseline of tree canopy
cover, which can be used to measure
the effectiveness of tree planting
and care activities over time.
3. Identify areas with high tree canopy
cover and develop strategies to
protect these areas from threats.
FIGURE 1. 2018 TREE CANOPY AND LAND COVER
d Oakland’s UTC assessment accounts for all trees
growing within the City limits.
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 63
Oakland has more tree canopy than other
cities in the region (Figure 2), primarily
due to the forested Oakland Hills.
Oakland’s Tree Canopy Stats
71% of tree canopy is on private property
29% of tree canopy is on public property.
46% is the average tree canopy covering Oakland’s Parks and Open Spaces 38% is the maximum tree canopy cover possible in Oakland if it were feasible to plant trees on all public and private property.
FIGURE 2. TREE CANOPY IN OAKLAND AND OTHER CITIES IN THE REGION 64 | Section Three
Oakland’s Tree Canopy Benefits
Each YEAR, all of the trees in Oakland (on both public and private property)… • Absorb 13,280 tons of carbon.
• Intercept and absorb 100 million gallons of stormwater. • Remove 679,080 pounds of air pollutants.
• Reduce summer temperatures by 2-9° Fahrenheit. 18,19
MAP 1. OAKLAND LAND COVER
Grass/Low-Lying Vegetation
Bare Soil
Open Water
Impervious Surfaces
Tree Canopy
Land Cover Class
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 65
Areas that were historically redlined (Grades C and D) have significantly less tree canopy today than areas of the city that were not redlined (Grades A and B) (Map 2).
MAP 2. OAKLAND
REDLINING MAP (1937)
(2018-2022 COUNCIL
DISTRICT BOUNDARIES)
Council Districts
Grade Commercial
Grade A
Grade B
Grade C
Grade D
Areas Not Redlined
Redlining Areas
66 | Section Three
MAP 3. OAKLAND LAND COVER MAP (2018)
(2018-2022 COUNCIL DISTRICT
BOUNDARIES)
MAP 4. TREE CANOPY COVER IN OAKLAND
(2018)
Oakland’s tree canopy cover varies among
council districts. The highest tree canopy
cover is found in eastern council districts
(Map 3), where trees are also more
common (Map 4).
Council Districts
Grass/Low-Lying Vegetation
Bare Soil
Open Water
Impervious Surfaces
Tree Canopy
Land Cover Class
Under 10%
10% – 20%
20% – 30%
30% – 40%
Over 40%
Canopy Percent
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 67
MAP 5. COMPOSITE SOCIAL EQUITY PRIORITY PLANTING MAP
Tree Canopy Equity Analysis
Areas of very high and high need for new trees are those with low or aging canopy cover and socially, racially, and/or economically vulnerable populations (frontline communities) that can benefit most from increases in tree canopy cover (Maps 5, 6). The provided planting maps are not indicative of jurisdictional boundaries and should not be interpreted as specific recommendations for tree planting in these areas. Instead, they offer a theoretical overview of locations where tree planting could be most beneficial.
Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Priority Level
68 | Section Three
EQUITY ANALYSIS FACTORS
The social equity priority planting analysis is based on the following data:
• BIPOC Population (U.S. Census)
• Median Household Income (U.S. Census)
• Population Density (U.S. Census)
• CalEnviroScreen Score by U.S. Census Block Group (CalEnviroScreen) • 2018 Tree Canopy Data
Each factor was weighted equally to create the Composite Social Equity Priority Planting Map (Map 5).
MAP 6. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS (CALENVIRONSCREEN) PRIORITY PLANTING MAP Very Low
Low
Moderate
High
Very High
Priority Level
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 69
MAP 7. TREE CANOPY LOSS BY
COUNCIL DISTRICT 2014-2018
(2018-2022 COUNCIL DISTRICT MAP)
Oakland’s Changing Tree Canopy
FIGURE 3. TREE CANOPY AND IMPERVIOUS SURFACE LAND COVER 2014 TO 2018 Between 2014 to 2018 Oakland lost 277 acres
of tree canopy (approximately 209 football
fields) and gained 1,296 acres of impervious
surfaces - roads, buildings, sidewalks, and
other hard surfaces (approximately 982
football fields) (Figure 3, Map 7).
Greater than a 5% Decrease
3% – 5% Decrease
0% – 3% Decrease
0% – 3% Increase
Canopy Percent Change
70 | Section Three
Public Trees
68,297
Potential
Planting Sites
29,006
Stumps
2,131
Public Tree Inventory
In 2020, Davey Resource Group arborists inventoried Oakland's public trees including their size, location, and species (Table 1, Figure 4).
TABLE 1. PUBLIC TREE INVENTORY SUMMARY
Public Tree Inventory Summary
Street Trees 56,056
Landscaped Park Trees 12,241
Total Public Trees Inventoried 68,297
Stumps 2,131
Potential Vacant Planting Sites* 29,006
Street Tree Stocking Level** 64%
Total Sites Inventoried 99,434
* Potential vacant planting sites need to be field verified to determine suitability for planting based on location of underground utilities, sidewalk accessibility, proximity to lights, street intersections, and other site factors. Not ALL potential vacant planting sites will be suitable for planting.
**Street Tree Stocking Level = number of street trees currently planted compared to the total number of available planting sites, including both occupied and vacant locations.
IMPORTANCE OF URBAN FOREST
AGE DIVERSITY
A sustainable urban forest strives to achieve industry
guidelines for age distribution (dashed line in Figure
5). This ensures that the overall canopy contains trees at varying stages of maturity. To achieve this requires both annual tree planting to replace dead trees, as
well as on-going tree pruning and care to improve
tree condition and health.
c Each of Oakland’s 56,000
street trees and 12,000
trees in landscaped parks
were inventoried by ISA
Certified Arborists.
FIGURE 4. PUBLIC TREE
INVENTORY SUMMARY OF SITES
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 71
MODELING TREE CANOPY SCENARIOS IN OAKLAND
The 2020 urban tree canopy assessment found that Oakland lost tree canopy going from 22.3% to 21.5% between 2015 and 2018. The loss in tree canopy is due to many factors including, old age, insect/disease, development, neglect, and storms. Three tree canopy scenarios were modeled to better understand how to increase tree canopy cover and the consequences of not doing so:
Tree Canopy Scenario 1:
Current Canopy Trend (No Action/Business as Usual)
Not Recommended
Tree Canopy Scenario 2:
No Net Loss in Tree Canopy
Tree Canopy Scenario 3:
Increase Tree Canopy to 22.5% by 2034 (Reverse the Trend) FUTURE TREE CANOPY BENEFITS: MODELING THE SCENARIOS
By 2034, if no action is taken and current practices continue (Scenario 1: Business as Usual), Oakland’s tree canopy is projected to decrease to 18.6%. This reduction in canopy cover will correspondingly impact the benefits derived from the canopy, as reflected in the calculations for Scenario 1.
To estimate future cumulative impacts of a decade-long annual tree planting initiative in scenarios 2 and 3, the i-Tree Planting Calculator Version 2.2.0 was used (https://planting.itreetools.org/).
Benefits
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Current Canopy
Trend
(No Action)
No Net Loss Increase to
22.5%
Air Quality (pounds)
(Ozone, Nitrogen Dioxide,
Sulfur Dioxide and
Particulate Matter (2.5)
Removed)
-88,280 +57,385 +121,868
Carbon Benefits (pounds)
(Carbon sequestered) -3,452,800 +14,068,444 +29,876,675 Stormwater Benefits
(gallons)
(Rainfall intercepted)
-13,080,923 +71,108,675 +151,011,070
d Table of changes in environmental benefits by scenario 72 | Section Three
Number of Trees
d Figure showing number of trees planted and projected tree canopy.
Tree Canopy Cover
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 73
SCENARIO 1: CURRENT CANOPY TREND (NO ACTION/BUSINESS AS USUAL) Trees Planted/Year: 0
Total Cost/Year: $0
2014 Tree Canopy Cover: 22.3%
2018 Tree Canopy Cover: 21.5%
2024 Estimated Tree Canopy Cover: 20.6%
2034 Projected Tree Canopy Cover: 18.6%
If no new trees are planted in Oakland, the Current Canopy Trend Scenario predicts a decrease in tree canopy to 18.6% by 2034. The City of Oakland’s annual tree planting efforts are not enough to compensate for the 66-acre loss in tree canopy each year (equivalent to an estimated 5,903 trees).
Although this scenario is assumed to have zero cost, the decline in tree canopy would result in a decline in tree benefits, affecting the health and well-being of Oakland residents.
SCENARIO 2: NO NET LOSS
Trees Planted/Year: 5,903
Total Number of Tree Planted 2024-2033: 59,030
Cost/Year: $7,338,060*
2014 Tree Canopy Cover: 22.3%
2018 Tree Canopy Cover: 21.5%
2024 Estimated Tree Canopy Cover: 20.6%
2034 Projected Tree Canopy Cover: 20.6%
Assuming the trends in canopy decline continued from 2018 to 2024, it is estimated that Oakland has a tree canopy coverage of 20.6% in 2024. To maintain a no net loss tree canopy goal moving forward (keeping tree canopy at a stable 20.6%), approximately 5,903 trees will need to be planted annually across public and private property through 2034 and sustained indefinitely. The number of trees is based on the replacement of 66 acres of canopy (approximately 5,903 trees) that are lost each year in Oakland due to old age, insect/disease, development, neglect, storms, and other factors.
SCENARIO 3: INCREASE TREE CANOPY TO 22.5% BY 2034
Trees Planted/Year: 12,536
Total Number of Tree Planted 2024-2033: 125,360
Cost/Year: $15,584,735*
2014 Tree Canopy Cover: 22.3%
2018 Tree Canopy Cover: 21.5%
2024 Estimated Tree Canopy Cover: 20.6%
2034 Projected Tree Canopy Cover: 22.5%
To increase the tree canopy cover of Oakland to 22.5% by 2034, approximately 12,536 trees per year must be planted across public and private property starting in 2024.
By 2034, the number of trees planted to maintain 22.5% canopy cover will decrease to approximately 6,500 annually. The estimated cost to implement this scenario is $15,584,735 per year.
*Note: Costs are based on contractor tree planting estimates of a 15 gallon tree, planted, staked, and watered weekly for eight months for two years ($1,243/tree).
TREE CANOPY SCENARIOS
74 | Section Three
d Future canopy goals based on three tree planting scenarios.
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 75
22.5%
20.6%
18.6%
Tree Canopy Cover (%)
Size and Age
Composition
Oakland has an excess of young trees (52%), a
shortage of maturing trees (11%), and a shortage
of mature trees (8%) (Figure 5) likely due to
inadequate tree maintenance over the last 15+
years that has resulted in shorter tree lifespans.
To address this, reinstating tree pruning and
resuming the street tree planting program are
necessary to improve the age composition of
Oakland’s trees. Investing in pruning and watering
programs for the young trees is also crucial to
enhance their health, minimize future maintenance
expenses, and maximize the benefits of
Oakland's public trees.
Tree Diversity
Tree diversity helps buffer the urban forest from
pest outbreaks, disease, and other threats.
The public tree inventory catalogued 535 different
tree species growing in Oakland. The top 5 public
tree species, which make up 30% of the inventoried
public tree population are:
1. London plane /sycamore (Platanus x
acerifolia) (9%)
2. Crepe myrtle (Lagerstroemia indica) (6%)
3. Callery pear (Pyrus calleryana) (5%)
4. Coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia) (5%)
5. Sweetgum (Liquidambar styraciflua) (5%)
Industry guidelines recommend that a single
species should not make up more than 10% of the
public tree population and no genus should make
up more than 20% of the population to reduce
the public tree population’s susceptibility to pests
and diseases.
56 No species or genus in Oakland
exceeds these recommendations (Figures 6 & 7).
FIGURE 5. SIZE/AGE DISTRIBUTION OF OAKLAND’S INVENTORIED TREES Young (0-8” Diameter) Establishing (9-17” Diameter) Maturing (18-24” Diameter) Mature (>25” Diameter) 76 | Section Three
Proportion of Inventoried Trees
Size/Age Classes (Diameter at Breast Height [DBH])
INVENTORIED PUBLIC TREES
Trees located in developed public rights-of-way (streets with sidewalks), landscaped parks, and surrounding
City facilities were inventoried. Trees in public open
spaces, undeveloped public rights-of-way (typically
streets without sidewalks), and on private property
were not collected in the inventory.
FIGURE 6. TOP 5 INVENTORIED PUBLIC TREE SPECIES IN OAKLAND Genus (plural, genera)
is a category of scientific
classification consisting
of related species of
organisms. For example the
tree species coast live oak
(Quercus agrifolia), red oak
(Quercus rubra), and holly
oak (Quercus ilex) are all in
the oak genus (Quercus).
FIGURE 7. TOP 5 INVENTORIED PUBLIC TREE GENERA IN OAKLAND 9%
6%
5%
5% 5%
10%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
London
Planetree/Sycamore
Crepe myrtle Callery pear Coast live oak Sweetgum
Oakland Industry Guideline
10%
8%
7% 7% 6%
20%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Platanus
(Planetree/Sycamore)
Pyrus (Pear) Quercus (Oak) Prunus (Cherry) Lagerstroemia (Crepe myrtle)
Oakland Industry Guideline
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 77
Urban Forest Vulnerability
By later this century, the number of days that are above 86°F in Oakland is expected to increase from fewer than 7 days per year to over 30 days (USDA, 2021).
CLIMATE CHANGE
Oakland's urban forest mitigates and buffers the
effects of climate change, but it is also susceptible
to threats created by climate change, such as
extreme heat, high winds, flooding, drought,
and wildfires. As Oakland’s climate warms and
precipitation patterns change, the types of trees
that are planted should be assessed to ensure
that they can thrive today while also being
resilient to projected future conditions. With
over 535 species growing along Oakland’s streets
and in City parks and public places, the use of less
commonly planted species should be promoted.
The City should also limit or eliminate the planting
of species that perform poorly in Oakland’s urban
forest (i.e., London plane/sycamore, Callery pear,
and sweetgum). Climate adaptation strategies
like assisted migration can be used to introduce
new species that are better suited to Oakland’s
changing climate.
While choosing the right tree for the right place is
a complex decision, considering projected climatic
suitability during species selection will contribute
to growing a resilient urban forest in Oakland (see
“Using the Tree Inventory as a Tool for Species
Management” on pages 80-81).
c University of California Cooperative Extension
staff inspect acacia tree die-off in the
Oakland Hills.
78 | Section Three
c Sudden Oak Death.
Credit: Richard Sniezko
ASSISTED MIGRATION
Assisted migration is a climate change adaptation strategy that refers to the human assisted movement of a plant or animal species. For trees, it involves planting a species outside of its historical range. This concept is relatively new, and experiments are ongoing to determine its effectiveness (Jacobs, 2022).
TREE PESTS & DISEASES
Insects and diseases play crucial roles in
maintaining the balance of healthy ecosystems.
However, urban forests, such as Oakland’s,
are particularly vulnerable to invasive pests
and diseases. These intruders can significantly
compromise the health, resilience, and ecological
services provided by the urban canopy, leading to
unforeseen expenses for the treatment or removal
of afflicted trees.
Furthermore, the challenges posed by climate
change, including extreme conditions like drought,
flooding, and elevated temperatures, exacerbate
these issues. Such environmental stresses
weaken trees, making them more susceptible to
infestations. Additionally, changing climates may
create favorable conditions for pests and diseases
previously unsuited to Oakland’s environment,
further threatening the urban forest’s integrity.
At least 54% of Oakland’s inventoried trees are
susceptible to at least one significant pest or
disease currently found in the United States,
including spotted lanternfly (Lycroma delicatula),
European spongy moth (Lymantria dispar),
sudden oak death (Phytophthora ramorum), Asian
longhorned beetle (Anoplophora glabripennis),
and crepe myrtle bark scale (Acanthococcus
lagerstroemiae). While many of these species are
not yet present in Oakland, their impact to the
city’s trees could be significant and monitoring
for their presence is critical for the health and
sustainability of Oakland’s urban forest.
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 79
USING THE TREE INVENTORY AS A TOOL FOR
SPECIES MANAGEMENT
Oakland’s species management recommendations will evolve with changing conditions like climate change, pests and disease, funding, and community preferences. By using tree inventory data and observations, these guidelines focus on improving tree health, minimizing environmental impact, and optimizing resource use. This approach aims to enhance the urban forest’s resilience and sustainability, recognizing the unique contributions of each tree species.
1. Adopt Selective Planting Strategies. Focus on tree species that balance environmental benefits with lower maintenance needs, addressing issues such as hardscape damage and water use and utilizing the strategy of “the right tree in the right place.” Gradually reduce planting of certain species not well adapted to Oakland’s climate and urban conditions and prioritize alternatives that enhance urban biodiversity with minimal challenges.
As indicated in analyses of the current public tree inventory, the genera and species recommended for limited future planting include:
2. Identify Candidates for Removal and Replacement. For trees in Oakland showing signs of poor adaptation to the urban environment or potential safety hazards, removal should be considered as a last resort and not taken lightly. These include species with issues similar to those on the limited future planting list. Every tree’s removal necessitates thorough scrutiny, recognizing its environmental and community value.
An expert arborist’s assessment is crucial to discern whether a tree can be preserved and nurtured or if removal and replacement with a more suitable species is the most responsible choice.
The following genera and species were identified in the current public tree inventory as commonly being in poor condition and/or causing potential safety hazards, and are therefore recommended to be assessed and removed and replaced as needed:
From left to right: Acacia (acacia), Jacaranda mimosifolia (jacaranda), Pinus (pine), Platanus (planetree), Prunus (cherry), Sequoia sempervirens (coast redwood), Ulmus (elm)
Oakland’s urban forest management will also continue to consider observational information.
From left to right: Cinnamomum
(camphor), Crataegus
(hawthorn), Fraxinus (ash),
Liquidambar (sweetgum)
80 | Section Three
3. Increase Routine Pruning. Several genera in the inventory were commonly recommended for priority (high-risk) pruning, indicating that the current frequency of pruning is inadequate and should be increased to ensure public safety and tree health.
Genera and species recommended for increased routine maintenance:
4.Consider Site Characteristics. Species and genera in this category are generally in fair to good condition but have a pattern of conflicts with hardscape and overhead utilities, as well as moderate water use rating. Although these species are suitable to Oakland’s urban forest, a thorough assessment of the site should be completed before species selection to ensure the tree is suitable for the location. Trees with a mature height over 25 feet should not be planted under overhead utilities to avoid future conflicts. The ideal water use rating of trees planted in Oakland is “low” or “very low.” Genera and species recommended for site characteristic evaluation:
FINDING A HOME FOR NATIVE TREES
Native tree species, such as the coast live oak, provide essential habitat for birds, insects, and mammals. However, urban challenges such as reflective heat surfaces, limited soil volume, compacted soils, human activities, surrounding infrastructure, and water scarcity affect survival rates and growth potential. These challenges will be amplified by climate change.
In managing Oakland’s urban forest, there’s a delicate balance between preserving native biodiversity and choosing species that are resilient to urban conditions. Native trees should be integrated wherever feasible—they are particularly well-suited for parks and open space, where soil is less disturbed and conditions are more favorable.
Tree planters should consult with California ReScape, Cal Poly’s SelecTree, or consult with an ISA-Certified Arborist to make these determinations.
From left to right: Celtis
(hackberry), Cupressus
(cypress), Eucalyptus
(eucalyptus), Pinus (pine)
From left to right: Celtis (hackberry)
(overhead utilities), Ginkgo biloba (ginkgo)
(site size, water usage), Lagerstroemia
(crepe myrtle) (site size), Magnolia
(magnolia) (site size, overhead utilities,
water usage), Pistacia chinensis (Chinese
pistache) (site size, overhead utilities),
Podocarpus (podocarpus) (site size,
overhead utilities, water usage), Pyrus
(pear) (site size overhead utilities, water
usage), Tristaniopsis (water gum) (site
size, overhead utilities)
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 81
STREET TREE CONDITION
The majority of Oakland's inventoried public
trees (72%) are in fair condition, meaning they
have minor issues that can be corrected (Figure
8). However, 9% of the trees are in poor or worse
condition. Performing routine tree maintenance
can improve tree condition, increase tree
benefits, reduce risk, and increase tree
longevity.
Tree species may struggle to thrive, or even survive,
in Oakland due to a combination of natural and
human-induced factors.
Climate. The distinctive Mediterranean climate of
Oakland, characterized by hot and dry summers
along with occasional winter cold snaps, may not
be suitable for a tree species found in nearby
regions. Extended periods of drought common in
Oakland can particularly strain trees, especially
those ill-equipped to handle arid conditions.
Soils. Oakland’s soils have an impact on which
tree species grow best. Like much of the Bay
Area, Oakland has a significant amount of clay
soil. On the positive side, clay soil is typically rich in nutrients and can hold water well, which can
be beneficial for supporting plant growth during
dry periods. However, clay soil also tends to
compact, leading to poor drainage and aeration,
depriving tree roots of oxygen. Some trees are
better adapted to poor drainage conditions, while
others may require improvement to the soil prior
to planting.
Site and Environmental Factors. Urban areas,
like Oakland, often have higher levels of pollution,
heat, and limited space for root growth. They
also have human activities such as construction,
vandalism, and improper tree care practices, such
as improper pruning, watering, and planting
techniques. Oftentimes these natural and
human-made factors affect trees in combination,
compounding the stress on the tree and leading
to trees in poor or dead condition. While no tree
species prefers these conditions, some are better
adapted to tolerate them.
c City staff climb oak tree with rope
and saddle.
FIGURE 8. CONDITION OF OAKLAND'S
INVENTORIED PUBLIC TREES
82 | Section Three
PUBLIC TREE MAINTENANCE
RECOMMENDATIONS
All trees and sites were assigned a maintenance
category during the inventory. If they were not
assigned as tree removal, stump removal, or tree
planting they were assigned as tree pruning (Figure
9). Tree pruning includes young tree pruning (to
train for form and structure), removal of dead
limbs, structural pruning, and pruning to address
obstructions to pedestrian access, roadways, signs,
and street lights.
• 64,254 trees are recommended for pruning
(92% of sites)
• 3,773 trees are recommended for removal
(5% of sites)
• 2,131 stumps are recommended for removal
(3% of sites)
The inventory also identified 29,006 potential sites
for tree planting, pending further review.
While tree maintenance activities should be
prioritized by risk, with tree removals and high
priority pruning addressed first, resources should
also be directed towards routine pruning and tree
planting to improve the resilience of Oakland’s
urban forest.
Like other city infrastructure, improper planning,
design, installation, or maintenance can lead
to shorter usable lifespan and unintended
consequences. For street trees, this could mean
trees dying prematurely or uprooting, tree limb
failures, damage to nearby buildings, conflicts
with below-ground infrastructure, and/or lifting
sidewalks. Since trees are living things, they
are more vulnerable to damage than other
city infrastructure. However, unlike other types
of infrastructure that lose value, with proper
maintenance the value of Oakland’s public trees
actually increases over time.
c Lack of street tree maintenance leads to
poor tree structure and eventual branch
failure. Credit: Christopher Buckley
FIGURE 9. RECOMMENDED
MAINTENANCE OF OAKLAND’S
INVENTORIED TREES AND STUMPS
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 83
CALCULATING TREE BENEFITS
The Urban Forest Plan quantifies the benefits
of Oakland's public street and park trees using
i-Tree Eco, a suite of industry-recognized tools
that measure and calculate the ecosystem
benefits of trees.
i-Tree is a partnership between the USDA Forest
Service, Davey Tree Expert Company, The Arbor
Day Foundation, the International Society of
Arboriculture, Society of Municipal Arborists,
Casey Trees, and SUNY College of Environmental
Science and Forestry. It was released in 2006
and its models are updated regularly based on
the latest science and research.
www.itreetools.org
PROJECTING TREE BENEFITS
Planting all available vacant street sites and those with stumps (31,137) to achieve 100% stocking could result in an additional $104,000 in benefits during their FIRST YEAR alone. These benefits will continue to increase as the trees grow and mature.* *This projection is based on guidance provided to City of Oakland Parks & Tree Division from the USDA Forest Service Albany, CA Research Station and the University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources.
Benefits of Oakland’s Public
Street and Park Trees
Oakland’s public street and park trees have an estimated replacement value of over $191 million (an average of $2,791 per public tree); and are estimated to provide at least $368,801 in carbon, air quality, and stormwater benefits each year (Figure 10, Table 2). The overall benefits of Oakland’s trees are presented in the Tree Canopy and Land Cover (see page 63). There are numerous other tree benefits that are not quantifiable by i-Tree Eco, but are valued by Oakland residents, such as mental and physical health, wildlife habitat, and the beauty that trees add to the city.
FIGURE 10. ANNUAL
ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS
OF OAKLAND’S INVENTORIED
PUBLIC TREES
84 | Section Three
ENERGY SAVINGS
In addition to the benefits in Table 2,
according to the U.S. Department of
Energy, “carefully positioned trees can
save up to 25% of the energy a typical
household uses.” (U.S. Dept of Energy, n.d.).
TABLE 2. ESTIMATED ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS PROVIDED BY OAKLAND’S
INVENTORIED TREES
Annual Benefits
Gross Carbon Sequestration
(tons/year) 23,429
($/year) $101,372
Avoided Runoff
(gallons/year) 25,400,000
($/year) $47,637
Pollution Removal
(pounds/year) 26,039
($/year) $219,072
Total Annual Benefits ($/year) $368,801
Structural Benefits
Lifetime Carbon Storage
(pounds) 65,832,000
($) $5,613,781
Replacement Value ($) $191,687,400
Total Structural Value ($) $197,301,181
c A Persian silk tree (Albizia julibrissin)
shades several Oakland homes. Credit:
Clifford Ham
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 85
Summary of the Current State of
Oakland’s Urban Forest
• Data from 2018 indicated Oakland had 21.5%
tree canopy cover. While this is higher than
other cities in the region, there is significant
disparity in canopy coverage between frontline
communities, which have as low as 9% coverage,
and more affluent areas in the Oakland Hills,
which have as high as 43% coverage.
• Pavement, structures and hard surfaces like
roads, parking lots, and buildings (impervious
surfaces) are increasing, while tree canopy
is decreasing. From 2014 to 2018, Oakland
experienced an increase of 1,296 acres in hard
surfaces, such as pavement and buildings, and a
loss of 277 acres of tree canopy.
• Oakland’s updated tree canopy
and inventory data are important
management tools. This data can be used
to make management decisions, estimate
budgets, and monitor changes over time. It
can be utilized by partners for research and
regional planning efforts.
• The lack of public tree maintenance has
resulted in poor tree condition. When trees
are in poor health or have structural issues,
it can decrease their lifespan and chances
of survival. Oakland has not proactively
maintained its public trees for over 15 years,
which can cause broken branches, decay,
and whole tree failures. Regular maintenance
can help address these issues, which would
improve the overall benefits Oakland’s trees
provide.
• Oakland’s public tree population has an
overall good size/age distribution. The
surplus of small trees and deficit of mature
trees can be better balanced by proactively
maintaining all public trees and thereby
increasing survivability.
• There are over 500 species planted along
Oakland’s streets and in City parks. The
city’s species diversity
among public trees is
generally good, with no
species overplanted.
This helps to reduce the
risk of the urban forest
declining due to a pest
or disease affecting any
one species.
c Street tree maintenance and removal often
requires heavy machinery.
86 | Section Three
• Tree species are being negatively impacted
by drought and climate change, and this
trend is projected to continue or even worsen
in the future. As mature street trees cannot
be feasibly or sustainably irrigated, they are
at risk of dying, which can result in increased
expenses for removing them. To mitigate
these risks, it is crucial to plant tree species
that are better suited to Oakland’s changing
climatic conditions.
• Large tree species are planted under high
voltage power lines. PG&E is required to
maintain clearance between their utilities and
trees. The typical method to accomplish this
is by removing the tops of trees, which can
result in poor tree structure and decline. A
"remove and replace" program could address
this issue by replacing problematic trees with
species that are more appropriate in size and
will not conflict with overhead utility lines in
the future.
• There is significant potential to plant more
street trees. The tree inventory identified
just over 29,000 possible sites where street
trees could potentially be planted, pending
further review.
• There are over 2,000 known stumps along
Oakland’s streets. These stumps are not
only unsightly but also cause frustration
within the community. Removing stumps and
replacing them, when appropriate, with new
trees can help eliminate blight and increase
the overall number of street trees.
• Oakland's urban forest is vulnerable to
loss from catastrophic wildfire due to
a significant portion of its tree canopy
being in “very high” wildfire risk areas.
This presents additional challenges and
considerations that will be addressed in the
Oakland Vegetation Management Plan.
d Trees native to Oakland may be
threatened by climate change.
c Oakland’s street tree inventory found 29,000 possible sites where street trees could be planted.
Oakland’s Urban Forest | 87
88 | Section Four
Section Four
Managing
Oakland’s
Urban Forest
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 89
The City of Oakland's Department of Public
Works – Parks & Tree Division within the Bureau
of Environment manages the care, planting,
and maintenance of 68,297 public street and
park trees and thousands of trees in open space
parks and other city-owned properties. They
also indirectly manage trees on private property
through regulation. Oakland’s public trees are
a valuable asset worth nearly $200 million,
and provide essential environmental, economic,
social, and health benefits to the community. Like
other essential infrastructure, such as roads
and bridges, proper management is crucial
for ensuring a resilient, safe, and sustainable
urban forest.
c City staff remove a hazardous street tree
with heavy-duty equipment.
c City staff prune tree limbs at Frank Ogawa Plaza.
Dialing 3-1-1 is the best
way to report tree-related
emergencies, concerns,
and service requests.
90 | Section Four
Key Insights about Oakland Parks &
Tree Division Operations
• Deferred tree maintenance creates a
substantial work backlog and amplifies
Oakland’s emergency workload. The Parks
& Tree Division lost significant funding and
staffing following the Great Recession,
which has severely limited tree maintenance
services. Funding, staffing, and services
have yet to be restored to pre-Recession
levels. Lack of regular maintenance
can exacerbate tree inequities as some
communities have the resources to maintain
trees in their neighborhoods while others
do not.
• There is a major backlog of dead or
hazardous trees that continues to grow.
Current staffing and resources levels cannot
keep up with demand.
• Deferred tree maintenance negatively
impacts other City services. Street
sweepers and garbage trucks cannot
reach the curb, paving machines cannot
drive down the road, streetlamps and
other infrastructure are impaired due to
overgrown branches.
• The Parks & Tree Division is in an
operationally reactive position, which is
logistically challenging and inefficient.
Tree crews have to travel significant
distances between each tree emergency
rather than working on one street or
neighborhood for a full day. Large jobs
that may take several hours or days are
often interrupted by emergency requests
in other locations. Compounding the
problem are inadequate staffing levels that,
together with deferred maintenance and a
high volume of emergency work, makes it
difficult to schedule work.
• Lack of tree maintenance is a source of
frustration for the community. While
many Oakland residents love trees in
general, they are frustrated by the lack of
maintenance and the associated nuisances
and safety risks caused by it (e.g., broken/
fallen branches, streetlamps being blocked,
conflicts with other infrastructure).
• Lack of tree planting, community
engagement, and public outreach
programs make it difficult to bring
awareness to the urban forest in the
face of Oakland’s many other
competing priorities.
c Emergency contractors remove an uprooted
tree that is blocking a road.
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 91
Hierarchy of Urban Forest
Management Needs
A strong foundation is essential for Oakland's urban forestry program to meet community needs and ensure a healthy and sustainable urban forest. By prioritizing the hierarchy of urban forest management needs and implementing sustainable, resilient, and equitable strategies, Oakland’s program can effectively improve the urban forest (Figure 11a). This section outlines Oakland's current urban forestry program in relation to the hierarchy, highlighting challenges, operational needs, and opportunities for improvement.
INNOVATION
PUBLIC OUTREACH &
EDUCATION
TREE PLANTING PROGRAM
TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM
PROACTIVE TREE MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM
DEAD/HIGH RISK TREE REMOVAL
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
BUDGET, STAFF, TRAINING & EQUIPMENT
TREE INVENTORY AND URBAN TREE CANOPY DATA
TREE ORDINANCES
FOUNDATIONAL
ADVANCED
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
FIGURE 11A.HIERARCHY
OF URBAN FORESTRY
MANAGEMENT NEEDS
92 | Section Four
ASSESSING OAKLAND ON THE HIERARCHY OF URBAN
FORESTRY MANAGEMENT NEEDS
= Established and implementation is fair to good.
= Established but in need of improvement.
= Not in place and/or in need of significant improvement.
INNOVATION
PUBLIC OUTREACH &
EDUCATION
TREE PLANTING PROGRAM
TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM
PROACTIVE TREE MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM
DEAD/HIGH RISK TREE REMOVAL
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
BUDGET, STAFF, TRAINING & EQUIPMENT
TREE INVENTORY AND URBAN TREE CANOPY DATA
TREE ORDINANCES
FOUNDATIONAL
ADVANCED
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
FIGURE 11B. HIERARCHY
OF URBAN FORESTRY
MANAGEMENT NEEDS
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 93
Tree Ordinances
The Management of Oakland’s Urban Forest is guided by policies outlined in the Oakland Municipal Code (OMC). The OMC has four chapters that specifically address trees.
Chapter 12.32 – Street Trees and Shrubs gives the
City the authority to plant, remove, and maintain
trees and shrubs on public property, including the
right to remove trees endangering public space.
Chapter 12.26 – Protected Trees protects all
trees of a certain size except for eucalyptus and
Monterey pine and sets the basis for the tree
removal permit process.
Chapter 12.40 – Hazardous Trees provides the
definitions and procedures of removing trees that
pose a public hazard.
Chapter 15.52 – Views allows residents to prune
their privately-owned trees to preserve panoramic
views but does not apply to native species or public
property trees.
INNOVATION
PUBLIC OUTREACH &
EDUCATION
TREE PLANTING PROGRAM
TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM
PROACTIVE TREE MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM
DEAD/HIGH RISK TREE REMOVAL
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
BUDGET, STAFF, TRAINING & EQUIPMENT
TREE INVENTORY AND URBAN TREE CANOPY DATA
TREE ORDINANCES
FOUNDATIONAL
ADVANCED
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
FIGURE 11C. HIERARCHY
OF URBAN FORESTRY
MANAGEMENT NEEDS
The Protected Tree Ordinance (Chapter 12.26) shall be updated and streamlined according to the community vision and goals of an adopted Urban Forest Plan to provide a stronger foundation for implementing the Plan and sustaining the urban forest and to reflect the City’s obligation to provide accessible paths of travel under the ADA.
94 | Section Four
Tree Inventory and
Urban Tree Canopy Data
Tree Inventory. A current and detailed GIS-based
public tree inventory provides vital information on
tree species, location, condition, and maintenance
needs, which is used to develop management plans
and prioritize work. Industry standards recommend
regular updates every 7-10 years to monitor public
trees and ensure that resources like funding,
staffing, and equipment are sufficient for necessary
tree maintenance and management. In 2020,
Oakland conducted its first ever citywide tree
inventory (Section 3).
Urban Tree Canopy Assessment. As outlined in
Section 3, an urban tree canopy (UTC) assessment
utilizes high-resolution aerial imagery to map the
amount and extent of tree canopy cover in a city,
on both public and private property. Oakland
conducted a UTC assessment in 2020 that
used 2018 aerial imagery. Industry standards
recommend UTC assessments be conducted every
5-10 years, or more frequently in the event of
natural disasters or development, to track changes
and evaluate how City policies and procedures are
impacting canopy cover.
INNOVATION
PUBLIC OUTREACH &
EDUCATION
TREE PLANTING PROGRAM
TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM
PROACTIVE TREE MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM
DEAD/HIGH RISK TREE REMOVAL
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
BUDGET, STAFF, TRAINING & EQUIPMENT
TREE INVENTORY AND URBAN TREE CANOPY DATA
TREE ORDINANCES
FOUNDATIONAL
ADVANCED
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
FIGURE 11D.HIERARCHY
OF URBAN FORESTRY
MANAGEMENT NEEDS
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 95
Budget, Staff, Resources, and Training
and San Francisco, California. While San Francisco
manages about 124,000 street trees to Oakland’s
68,297 street and park trees, their budget is over 8
times higher than Oakland’s. San Francisco has 201
full-time equivalent budgeted positions compared
to Oakland’s 23.
Budget increases are necessary to expand and
sustain Oakland's urban forest. Table 4 highlights
common funding methods employed by other
municipalities to support their urban forests.
Operations scenarios for Oakland to adequately
maintain and grow the urban forest are detailed
later in this section.
Budget. Oakland's urban forestry program lacks
a dedicated funding source and instead relies
on a variety of funds that shift and change each
budget cycle. Due to severe budget cuts in 2008,
the Parks & Tree Division has been reduced to
focusing exclusively on emergency tree responses
to fulfill the minimum expectation of keeping
roads and sidewalks clear from fallen trees and
branches. As a result, resident tree requests
remain unaddressed, leading to low levels of
service and community dissatisfaction. Figure 12
highlights the urban forestry program budgets
for fiscal year 2023-24 for the cities of Oakland
FIGURE 12. FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 BUDGETS FOR URBAN FORESTRY PROGRAMS IN
THE CITY OF OAKLAND AND CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO
96 | Section Four
Staff. Prior to the 2008 recession, there were a total of 35 full-time tree staff plus part-time staff and high school students. However, the Great Recession led to significant staffing cuts that have greatly reduced service levels for over 15 years. At its lowest (2008-2017), there were 16 full-time budgeted Parks & Tree Division positions dedicated to tree work.
With the addition of new funding sources associated with Measure BB (2014) and Measure Q (2020), staffing levels have increased slightly in recent years. As of May 2023, the Parks & Tree Division has 23 budgeted positions, with 16 positions currently filled, and 7 vacancies (Table 3, as of August 2023). Recruiting and retaining staff is an ongoing challenge with vacancy rates typically hovering around 30%.
TABLE 3. OAKLAND PARKS & TREE DIVISION STAFF (MAY 2023) Full-Time Employee (FTE)
Position Titles
Number of
FTE Budgeted
Positions
Number of Staff
Positions Currently
Filled
Number of
Vacancies
Tree Supervisor II 1 1 0
Tree Supervisor I 2 1 1
Administrative Analyst II 1 1 0
Arboricultural Inspector 2 2 0
Tree Trimmer Crew Leader 4 0 4
Tree Trimmer 9 7 2
Tree Worker 3 3 0
Administrative Assistant II 1 1 0
TOTAL 23 16 7
Percent of Total 70% 30%
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 97
Training & Credentials. To enhance operational
capabilities and stay current with industry
standards, Oakland shall strive to have every staff
member hold at least one appropriate International
Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Certification based
on their job classification. Currently, among the
15 full-time staff, there are five ISA Certified
Arborists, some of whom also have additional ISA
credentials including Municipal Specialist, Tree
Risk Assessment Qualification, and Board Certified
Master Arborist.
Equipment. The Parks & Tree Division has a diverse
range of specialized heavy-duty equipment tailored
to Oakland’s unique topography and urban forest.
Work challenges include ascending over 1,000
feet in elevation, safely removing trees over 100
feet tall, and efficiently transporting logs downhill.
Maintenance and repair of this equipment can be
hindered by low staffing levels in the City’s heavyduty equipment repair shop. These challenges are compounded by a high rate of equipment usage,
age, condition, and reliability.
INNOVATION
PUBLIC OUTREACH &
EDUCATION
TREE PLANTING PROGRAM
TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM
PROACTIVE TREE MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM
DEAD/HIGH RISK TREE REMOVAL
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
BUDGET, STAFF, TRAINING & EQUIPMENT
TREE INVENTORY AND URBAN TREE CANOPY DATA
TREE ORDINANCES
FOUNDATIONAL
ADVANCED
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
_ City staff practice large
tree felling techniques in
Joaquin Miller Park.
FIGURE 11E. HIERARCHY
OF URBAN FORESTRY
MANAGEMENT NEEDS
98 | Section Four
Potential Funding Source Description
Stormwater Fund
Explore directing funding to the Parks and Tree Division in recognition of the stormwater benefits provided by Oakland’s street trees. The 68,297 public trees inventoried intercept over 5.3 million gallons of stormwater each year. “Percent for Trees”
Program
Develop a program where a percentage of City Capital Improvement Project budgets are set aside for public tree maintenance and planting related to or within a project area.
Fees
Institute fees for plan reviews and inspections of private and public activities.
Collect in-lieu mitigation (replacement) fees to use towards all urban forestry management and planning activities.
Public Tree Fund
Establish a Tree Fund in City Code to collect fees for damage and removal of public trees, and to accept donations that can be used for urban forestry activities and programs.
Parcel Tax Institute a tax calculated per foot of a property's right-of-way frontage for the planting, care, and maintenance of public trees.
Charter Amendment
Create a ballot measure asking voters to establish a minimum annual allocation from the City's general fund to be dedicated to urban forestry activities.
Special Taxing Districts/
Assessment District
Designate an area of the City as a special taxing district, where a majority of property owners allow the City to provide public improvement or special services through a non-ad valorem assessment (not based on property value).
General Obligation
(GO) Bond
GO Bonds are suitable for capital costs of tree planting and establishment (ongoing maintenance is not eligible). This is an especially appealing option when interest rates are low. California cities pay debt service from GO bonds through ad valorem property taxes, where assessments are based on property value.
Internal Budget Transfers
Between Departments
Analyze budgets to identify where Parks & Tree Division can recoup costs for work provided to other City departments. Determine if there may be justifiable reallocations of budget resources or opportunities to share resources between departments.
Carbon Financing
Carbon financing may be able to support long-term tree planting and preservation projects. As companies look to offset their carbon emissions, the high visibility and co-benefits associated with these projects make them an attractive option in the U.S. voluntary carbon market.
Grants
Federal and state government agencies, foundations, and other institutions offer one-time funding opportunities to support tree planting and other urban forestry-related projects.
TABLE 4. POTENTIAL URBAN FOREST FUNDING SOURCES
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 99
Examples
Since 2016, Portland, Oregon has collected a stormwater service charge from all properties with impervious areas. As of January 2023, the rate is $7.50 per billable unit. Part of this is granted to large-scale green infrastructure projects that provide benefits for watershed health and the community.
More than half of the U.S. states maintain percent-for-art programs, in which the percentage of budgets are set aside for public art. Philadelphia was the first municipality in the U.S. to adopt the ordinance in 1959, with Baltimore following in 1964, San Francisco and Hawaii in 1967, and Seattle in 1973.
East Palo Alto, California requires that in-lieu fees must be paid if a replacement tree may not be reasonably planted on site after tree removal.
Boston's Tree Canopy Ordinance of 2021 established a Street Tree Fund to collect fees to fund planting, maintenance, and other tree-related needs on City property.
The State of Ohio permits municipalities to collect fees for their public trees (Ohio Revised code Chapter 721.011). The most common method of assessment is charging a fee between $0.19 -$1.16 per foot of a property's right-of-way frontage.
Measure Q was passed by Oakland's voters in 2020, authorizing the City to collect parcel tax for 20 years to support parks and recreation, homeless services, and water projects.
In 2016, San Francisco residents voted in favor of shifting responsibility of street tree maintenance from private property owners to the City, allocating $19 million per year from the general fund to pay for maintenance.
San Jose, California has designated Special Landscape Assessment Districts to fund activities including street tree planting and maintenance.
San Francisco voters approved a Road Repaving and Street Safety GO bond in 2011 that included funding for street tree planting and repairing hardscape damage from tree roots.
Oklahoma's Municipal Budget Act allows cities to transfer funds between departments and/or between expenditure categories.
In 2022, 13 government entities and other organizations with urban forestry projects collectively earned over $1 million through the purchase of carbon credits registered with City Forest Credits—the largest and firstof-its-kind transaction.
Examples: U.S. Forest Service Urban and Community Forestry Program; EPA Climate and Environmental Justice Block Grants, EPA Clean Water State Revolving Fund, NFWF America the Beautiful Challenge, CAL FIRE Urban and Community Forestry Grant Program, and CAL FIRE Wildfire Prevention Grants Program. 100 | Section Four
Tree Maintenance
As detailed in the budget and staffing section,
the loss of resources has impacted the Parks &
Tree Division’s ability to provide proactive tree
maintenance. The division only has the staff and
resources to respond to the highest priority
service requests received through the 311
service request system. Tree service requests are
ranked as follows:
Priority 1: Emergency work fallen trees or limbs
blocking a path of travel or damaging property,
or large broken/hanging limbs that pose an
immediate safety hazard.
Priority 2: Potential risk to public safety
dead, dying, or diseased trees that are still
standing; trees blocking traffic signals or
pedestrian clearnace; tree pruning necessary to
pave roads, repair buildings, or maintain other
infrastructure.
URBAN FORESTRY TRAINING AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT
According to the Urban Forest Plan community survey, more than 60% of respondents believe that Oakland should prioritize creating job opportunities for local residents to plant and maintain trees.
The ECAP emphasizes the importance of providing meaningful opportunities for local participation and wealth creation to promote climate justice. Developing an arboriculture training or apprenticeship program could offer a pathway for disadvantaged populations and youth to gain the skills necessary to maintain the urban forest, while also creating a pool of qualified candidates for the Parks & Tree Division. By training community members who are already invested in the area, there is a greater likelihood of long-term employment and retention. Collaborating with local universities, schools, and organizations that support employment opportunities for those formerly involved in the justice system is another viable option to explore. Grant opportunities are available that can support workforce development programs.
Priority 3: Routine maintenance (currently not
funded and does not occur) - structural pruning,
stump grinding, tree planting, and tree watering.
Figures 13 and 14 display the number of tree
service requests received and the number of
units completed by work order type for fiscal
years 2020-2022.
To enhance the sustainability and equity of Oakland's
urban forest and improve customer service, it is
crucial for the City to reinstate a proactive tree
maintenance program focused on routine street
tree pruning. For undeveloped rights-of-way that do
not have sidewalks and curbs, proactive maintenance
focuses on pruning tree limbs for vehicle clearance
and abating hazards.
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 101
PROACTIVE TREE MAINTENANCE
Proactive tree maintenance refers to a planned and systematic approach to caring for trees before problems arise, with the goal of preventing damage, improving tree health and longevity, ensuring equitable service delivery, and reducing longterm costs. This includes regular inspections, pruning, and watering, as well as measures to monitor and prevent pest and disease outbreaks.
Benefits of Regular Tree Inspections:
• Identify and manage risks
• Detect potential threats from pests or
diseases
• Expand the range of management
options
• Develop strategic plans for
management actions
• Assess assets and allocate budgets
• Set priorities
• Detect and address issues before they
escalate into emergencies
Foundational
INNOVATION
PUBLIC OUTREACH &
EDUCATION
TREE PLANTING PROGRAM
TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM
PROACTIVE TREE MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM
DEAD/HIGH RISK TREE REMOVAL
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
BUDGET, STAFF, TRAINING & EQUIPMENT
TREE INVENTORY AND URBAN TREE CANOPY DATA
TREE ORDINANCES
FOUNDATIONAL
ADVANCED
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Benefits of Routine Tree Pruning:
• Enhance tree health and lifespan
• Minimize long-term maintenance
expenses*
• Improve staff scheduling and efficiency
• Provide equitable service throughout
the city
• Mitigate the risk of tree splitting or
uprooting
• Decrease storm damage
• Maximize long-term benefits from
trees
• Minimize tree hazards and risks
*Implementing a routine pruning program instead of relying solely on emergency tree work can lead to a 50% reduction in tree maintenance costs (AECOM, 2013).
FIGURE 11F. HIERARCHY
OF URBAN FORESTRY
MANAGEMENT NEEDS
102 | Section Four
FIGURE 13. NUMBER OF UNITS COMPLETED BY WORK ORDER TYPE FISCAL YEARS 2020–2022
(square feet)
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 103
FIGURE 14. TREE SERVICE REQUESTS RECEIVED BY FISCAL YEARS 2020–2022 104 | Section Four
ALIGNING TREE MAINTENANCE WITH THE OAKLAND
MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADOPTED CITY POLICIES
The Oakland Municipal Code gives the City power and authority over all trees on City streets. The adopted Equitable Climate Action Plan (ECAP) and the adopted Environmental Justice Element of the Oakland General Plan both set clear goals for City tree maintenance.
Oakland Municipal Code 12.32.020 - Powers and Authority Over Trees The City Manager shall have full power and authority over the planting, removal and maintenance of trees and shrubs in or upon any public street or public grounds and shall have the right and power to establish rules and regulations relating thereto. The City Manager or his or her delegated representative shall have the power to cause the trimming or removal of any tree or shrub in or upon any public street or public grounds which is diseased or is endangering or which may endanger the security or usefulness of any public street, sewer, or sidewalk.
The ECAP Action CR-2: Expand and Protect Tree Canopy Coverage established that the City create a fifty-year Urban Forest Plan that:
• Prioritizes strategies to address disparities among neighborhoods in tree canopy coverage; • Ensures that carbon sequestration is a major factor in tree planting targets, selection of tree species, and tree management practices;
• Establishes a clear and sustainable funding mechanism for ongoing tree maintenance; and • Establishes a protocol and goals for community partnerships for tree planting and maintenance.
The Environmental Justice Element of the Oakland General Plan, Goal EJ-7.15 states to:
• Implement the Urban Forest Plan, a comprehensive, area-wide urban canopy and vegetation plan that identifies locations where trees can be added and maintained, such as parks, streets, and rights-of-way.
• Develop a plan to maintain and protect existing trees that provide shade, reduce urban heat island impacts, reduce flooding, reduce pollution, and reduce exposure to air pollution emissions in communities most affected by air pollution. • Align tree canopy with climate resilience planning, including green stormwater infrastructure.
Trees should be low on the allergenic scale, to serve EJ communities most impacted by air pollution and asthma. This includes partnering with local nonprofit groups, encouraging trees on private property, and working with the community on tree maintenance and (as needed) removal. • Prioritize tree canopy in Environmental Justice Communities with the least amount of canopy.
The Parks & Tree Division should seek funding to routinely prune tree branches on ALL trees growing in the developed public right-of-way, including those planted without permission. Doing so is a necessary process for the City to achieve its tree canopy goals.
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 105
INNOVATION
PUBLIC OUTREACH &
EDUCATION
TREE PLANTING PROGRAM
TREE PRESERVATION PROGRAM
PROACTIVE TREE MAINTENANCE
PROGRAM
DEAD/HIGH RISK TREE REMOVAL
EMERGENCY RESPONSE
BUDGET, STAFF, TRAINING & EQUIPMENT
TREE INVENTORY AND URBAN TREE CANOPY DATA
TREE ORDINANCES
FOUNDATIONAL
ADVANCED
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Tree Preservation, Tree Planting,
Outreach & Education, and Innovation
Oakland does not currently have programs in place that focus on tree preservation, tree planting, public outreach and education, and innovation. A variety of factors influence the absence of these programs, including:
• Lack of dedicated urban forestry funding. Budget constraints and a focus on reactive priorities hinder the establishment and implementation of these programs. • Organizational and logistical challenges. Implementing and managing these programs requires coordination among various City departments, community organizations, and stakeholders. This would require ongoing staff capacity and infrastructure, which is currently lacking. • Community Engagement and Public Support. Without enough active involvement and advocacy from residents and community groups, it can be difficult to garner the necessary support and momentum for the implementation of these programs. Public education and outreach efforts are crucial to raise awareness, generate interest, and cultivate a sense of ownership and responsibility among the community. The Parks & Tree Division’s capacity to effectively engage the community is currently lacking.
Several of the Goals, Strategies, Action Items (Section 5) articulate how to address these shortcomings.
FIGURE 11G. HIERARCHY
OF URBAN FORESTRY
MANAGEMENT NEEDS
106 | Section Four
Operation Scenarios
Oakland can estimate the costs of a proactive tree maintenance program by using tree inventory data and staff and contractor cost information. GIS-based tree locations allow tree pruning work to be scheduled so that each tree is inspected and pruned on a set cycle. Two scenarios are modeled to illustrate the estimated quantities and costs of pruning each of Oakland's street and park trees once every 7 years, plus addressing the backlog of dead or hazardous trees and stumps. Funding is also allocated to support tree planting activities by non-profit organizations. Scenario A uses Parks & Tree Division crew members with minimal contractor assistance, while Scenario B uses a combination of Parks & Tree Division crews and contractors.
Scenario B, with its mix of City staff and contractors, is recommended due to the City’s ongoing challenges hiring and retaining Parks & Tree Division staff.
More detailed scenario information is provided in Appendix A. c City staff perform chainsaw maintenance.
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 107
OPERATIONS SCENARIO A
TABLE 5. SCENARIO A STAFF
REQUIREMENTS
Position
Number
of Staff
Tree Trimmer 19
Tree Trimmer Crew Leader 7
Tree Supervisor I 5
Tree Worker 15
Park Attendant (Part-Time) 18
Arboricultural Inspector 4
Program Analyst I
(Urban Forestry Ambassador) 2
Administrative Analyst II 1
Tree Supervisor II 1
Administrative Assistant II 1
TOTAL STAFF 73
Operations Scenario A uses primarily Parks & Tree
Division staff with limited support from contractors
(Table 5). The Scenario establishes a 7-year pruning
cycle and addresses high-priority tree removals
in the first three years. Tree pruning and stump
removal programs are also established.
Operations Scenario A requires 73 City staff
and an average annual implementation cost of
$20,813,589, with a total cost of $145,695,122
over seven years.
OPERATIONS SCENARIO B
TABLE 6. SCENARIO B STAFF
REQUIREMENTS
Position
Number
of Staff
Tree Trimmer 7
Tree Trimmer Crew Leader 3
Tree Supervisor I 6
Tree Worker 11
Park Attendant (Part-Time) 15
Arboricultural Inspector 4
Program Analyst I
(Urban Forestry Ambassador) 2
Administrative Analyst II 1
Tree Supervisor II 1
Administrative Assistant II 1
TOTAL STAFF 51
Operations Scenario B uses Parks & Tree Division
staff with a higher proportion of contractors to
perform tree maintenance and removal work.
(Table 6). Contractors perform routine pruning,
and the focus in the first four years is on highpriority tree removals, emergency tree removals, and removing trees lost to annual mortality. Tree
planting and stump removal programs are also
established using a combination of city staff and
contractors.
Operations Scenario B requires 51 City staff
and an average annual implementation cost of
$16,981,440, with a total cost of $118,870,083
over seven years.
A detailed seven-year budget for operation
scenarios A and B is presented in Table 7.
108 | Section Four
TABLE 7. TREE WORK SUMMARY OPERATIONS SCENARIOS A AND B TREE PRUNING Year 1
( # of Trees)
Year 2
( # of Trees)
Scenario A - City Crews with Minor Contractor Support
Routine Pruning (City Crews) 8,517 8,517
Priority Pruning* (City Crews) 2,452 2,452
Pruning, Raising, Clearance in Hills (City Crews) 3,056 3,056 Total 14,024 14,024
Scenario B - Hybrid: City Crews and Contractors
Routine Pruning - Trees (Contractors) 8,517 8,517
Priority Pruning and Clearance in Hills (City Crews) 4,690 4,690 Total 13,207 13,207
*Priority Pruning includes trees identified in the tree inventory that require priority pruning and emergency/request based pruning for uninventoried public trees
TREE REMOVAL Year 1
( # of Trees)
Year 2
( # of Trees)
Scenario A - City Crews with Minor Contractor Support
Tree Removals (City Crews) 1,584 1,562
Total 1,584 1,562
Scenario B - Hybrid: City Crews and Contractors
Tree Removals (City Crews) 1,757 1,757
Tree Removals (Contractors) 341 90
Total 2,098 1,847
TREE PLANTING AND STUMP REMOVAL Year 1
( # of Trees)
Year 2
( # of Trees)
Scenario A - City Crews with Minor Contractor Support
Tree Planting 3,133 3,133
Stump Removals (Contractors) 2,201 2,201
Scenario B - Hybrid: City Crews and Contractors
Tree Planting (City Crews) 3,133 3,133
Stump Removals (Contractors) 2,201 2,201
TREE INSPECTIONS Year 1
( # of Trees)
Year 2
( # of Trees)
Scenario A - City Crews with Minor Contractor Support
Tree Inspections 1,515 1,515
Total 1,515 1,515
Scenario B - Hybrid: City Crews and Contractors
Tree Inspections (City Staff) 1,515 1,515
Total 1,515 1,515
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 109
Year 3
( # of Trees)
Year 4
( # of Trees)
Year 5
( # of Trees)
Year 6
( # of Trees)
Year 7
( # of Trees) Total
8,517 8,517 8,517 8,517 8,517 59,618
0 0 0 0 0 4,903
3,056 3,056 3,056 3,056 3,056 21,392
11,572 11,572 11,572 11,572 11,572 85,910
8,517 8,517 8,517 8,517 8,517 59,618
4,690 3,056 3,056 3,056 3,056 26,292
13,207 11,572 11,572 11,572 11,572 85,910
Year 3
( # of Trees)
Year 4
( # of Trees)
Year 5
( # of Trees)
Year 6
( # of Trees)
Year 7
( # of Trees) Total
1,865 1,264 1,264 1,264 1,264 10,067
1,865 1,264 1,264 1,264 1,264 10,067
1,757 1,757 809 809 809 9,457
90 90 90 90 90 881
1,847 1,847 899 899 899 10,337
Year 3
( # of Trees)
Year 4
( # of Trees)
Year 5
( # of Trees)
Year 6
( # of Trees)
Year 7
( # of Trees) Total
3,133 3,133 3,133 3,133 3,133 21,929
2,201 1,795 1,264 1,264 1,264 12,190
3,133 3,133 3,133 3,133 3,133 21,929
2,201 1,795 1,264 1,264 1,264 12,190
Year 3
( # of Trees)
Year 4
( # of Trees)
Year 5
( # of Trees)
Year 6
( # of Trees)
Year 7
( # of Trees) Total
1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 10,605
1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 10,605
1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 10,605
1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 10,605
110 | Section Four
Meeting Tree Canopy Goals
c Earth Day Arroyo Viejo Park. c Parks & Tree Division supervisor in front of Jack London oak at City Hall.
c Arbor Day in Columbian Gardens Park.
Since the measured overall tree canopy coverage in
2018 was 21.5% and we estimate that the 2024 tree
canopy coverage is 20.6%, achieving a No Net Loss
Tree Canopy Goal (maintaining 20.6% tree canopy
coverage) will necessitate the planting of 5,903
trees annually.
To increase tree canopy coverage to 22.5% by 2034,
it will be essential to plant 12,536 trees per year.
Operational Budget Scenarios A and B both
incorporate the City’s commitment to planting
3,133 trees each year. To reach either of these Tree
Canopy Goals, it will be crucial to garner active
participation from volunteers, community partners,
property owners, and residents in planting trees
across various property types within Oakland.
Managing Oakland’s Urban Forest | 111
CITY WORKERS, CONTRACTORS, AND VOLUNTEERS
Tree planting and maintenance will require the efforts of the City of Oakland, tree contractors, and community members/organizations. There are advantages and disadvantages for each group, which shall be considered when deciding how best to distribute the work.
City Staff Advantages:
• Technical expertise
• Access to a wide range of heavy-duty
equipment
• Long-term stakeholders in urban forest
• Institutional knowledge
• Citywide perspective
• Access to City resources and facilities
City Staff Disadvantages:
• Inadequate staffing levels and vacancy
rates affect work capacity
• Difficult to scale up quickly or pivot scope
• Split focus due to competing priorities
• Constraints of working within bureaucracy
Volunteer Advantages:
• Community participation increases sense of
ownership in the urban forest, contributes
to a positive culture, and other positive side
effects
• Fewer bureaucratic constraints
• Motivated and passionate
• Can work across jurisdictions and on private
property
• Can scale up and pivot scope quickly
• In some cases, may be a lower cost method
of getting work done
• In some cases, volunteers may be funded by
outside sources
Volunteer Disadvantages:
• Limited technical expertise
• Limited to light-duty work
• Follow-through cannot be mandated
• Volunteers still require City training,
support, and supervision
• Long-term commitment, work quality, and
accountability may vary
c Parks & Tree Division crewmembers.
Contractor Advantages:
• Technical expertise
• Access to a wide range of heavy-duty
equipment
• Ability to scale up and pivot scope quickly
• Flexibility, lack of bureaucratic constraints
• More easily funded by grants or 3rd party
funding sources
Contractor Disadvantages:
• Require ongoing management
by the City
• No long-term stake in the
urban forest
• Costs can vary depending on
market rates, supply/demand
112 | Section Five
Section Five
Implementation
Implementation| 113
The Urban Forest Plan’s goals, strategies, and action items are based on a synthesis of the community’s vision, data and analyses of Oakland’s urban forest, urban forestry best management practices, and equity considerations. They fall into three categories:
PROGRAMS
ways to implement actions
PEOPLE
community and human-focused
POLICY
ways to provide the basis for action
CITY EQUITY COMMUNITY TREE
INVENTORY
BEST
PRACTICES CANOPY
PLAN
BUDGET
FUNDING
ACT
& REACT
PEOPLE POLICY PROGRAMS
FRAMEWORK FOR THE URBAN FOREST PLAN’S GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTION ITEMS 114 | Section Five
SETTING PRIORITIES
The Implementation Team will assign
priorities to each action item, establish
estimated timelines, and identify the
resources needed to accomplish each one.
PLAN ADOPTION
1 4
The Urban Forest Plan must first be
adopted by Oakland City Council in order
to become official policy.
City government and partners perform
agreed upon action items according to
implementation guidelines.
ALLOCATING
FUNDING & RESOURCES
Identify, obtain, and allocate adequate
resources, including funding, staff, and
equipment, to support the
implementation of the Urban Forest Plan
action items. Consider internal funding
sources as well as outside funding
opportunities through grants,
partnerships, and community initiatives.
An Implementation Team composed of
City of Oakland staff, local partners,
residents, and community leaders will be
formed to link action items to funding,
staffing, and partnership opportunities,
measure and monitor progress, and adapt
to changing conditions over time. This
Team may take shape in the form of an
official City Committee, working group of
an existing Committee, or other means.
The Implementation Team will track and
evaluate progress, celebrate successes,
hold government and partners
accountable, and provide transparency to
the public through reporting.
IMPLEMENTATION TEAM
6 2
3 MONITORING &
MEASURING PROGRESS
5PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
PERIODIC REVIEW AND UPDATES OF THE URBAN FOREST PLAN
The Urban Forest Plan is a living document designed to be periodically reviewed and updated every 5–10 years based on the changing needs of Oakland’s trees, community priorities, and implementation progress. Oakland Public Works will lead the review and update process.
Implementation| 115
Guiding Principles for Implementation
The Urban Forest Plan’s Guiding Principles are based on the those of the Oakland Department of Race & Equity.
• On-going community engagement, with a
focus on frontline communities, to learn and
adapt to arising community needs.
• Explore and develop partnerships where
frontline members are directly involved in
identifying problems and solutions.
• Co-create policies and programs with
frontline community members, removing
barriers to participation.
• Prioritize service provision in frontline
communities and start citywide programs in
frontline communities.
• Use analytic tools to measure equity
indicators over time and evaluate the impact
of equity-focused programming.
• Anticipate, monitor, and mitigate
unintended consequences that
may directly or indirectly affect
frontline communities.
c Arbor Day tree planting at Bushrod Park, 2017. Credit: CAL FIRE. 116 | Section Five
POTENTIAL IMPLEMENTATION PARTNERS
This list of partners is not comprehensive; more partners will be included in the future.
California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection (CAL FIRE) works to expand and
improve the management of trees and related
vegetation in communities throughout California
through the Urban & Community Forestry
Program. The program gives grant funding to
communities for projects, including tree planting,
municipal tree inventories, management plans,
urban forest educational efforts, and other
innovative urban forestry projects.
California Interfaith Power and Light is a faithbased organization that activates congregations to steward the environment through reducing
energy consumption and greenhouse gas
emissions. Power and Light served as a partner
for the community engagement and outreach
efforts for the Urban Forest Plan.
Caltrans (Landscape Architecture) manages
the roadside of California Highways in Bay Area
counties. Requests for tree planting to serve as
buffers from freeways are common, but funding
is limited.
City Administrator’s Office oversees the day-today operations of all City departments to ensure the goals and policy directives of the Mayor and
City Council are implemented. This department
houses the City’s Sustainability Program and
ADA Programs Division, both of which are
instrumental in the development of this Plan and
for effectively implementing it.
Common Vision is a local non-profit organization
that works with low-income schools and
neighborhoods to build community gardens and
plant fruit tree orchards. Common Vision served
as a partner for the community engagement and
outreach efforts for the Urban Forest Plan.
Oakland City Council establishes policy, budgets
City resources, and allocates annual spending.
East Bay Regional Park District manages
a park system in Alameda and Contra Costa
counties with parklands that border Oakland. The
proximity to Oakland provides opportunities to
share expertise and knowledge on tree planting
as well as the preservation and management of
both natural and cultural resources.
Forest & Tree is an outdoor learning organization in
Oakland that provides educational programming
about the natural resources in the East Bay area
and tree planting projects. Forest & Tree served
as a partner for the community engagement and
outreach efforts for the Urban Forest Plan.
Merritt College provides educational and training
programs in arboriculture including Associates
Degrees and certificate programs.
Neighborhood Councils are made up of Oakland
residents working in partnership with the City of
Oakland to address ongoing problems in their
neighborhoods.
Oakland Fire Department lessens fire risk
through vegetation management. The
Department conducts annual inspections of
private property and city-owned parcels in
Oakland Hills (high fire risk zone) to ensure
that structures maintain a defensible space.
Vegetation management is primarily focused on
reducing ground fuels.
Oakland Department of Public Works
Environmental Stewardship Team manages a
volunteer program to clean and green the City
through tree planting, habitat restoration, and
park maintenance support.
Oakland Information Technology Department,
GIS Division is responsible for all City geographic
information system (GIS) data and mapping.
The Division supports Parks & Tree Division by
maintaining and updating the GIS inventory of
trees in the rights-of-way and assists in managing
tree ownership data.
Oakland Unified School District works to
improve school yards through urban greening
grants, the living school yards project, and has
goals to fund a living school yards master plan.
Oakland Parks, Recreation, and Youth
Development Department oversees
programming for City parks. The Department
does not do any tree maintenance on park lands.
Implementation| 117
Oakland Parks and Recreation Foundation is
a 501(c)(3) non-profit that administers grants,
provides advocacy, strategic advice, and
facilitation for groups and partners to augment
the urban forest through planting trees. Oakland
Parks and Recreation Foundation served as a
partner for the community engagement and
outreach efforts for the Urban Forest Plan.
Oakland Department of Transportation
(OakDOT) is responsible for managing and
improving the safety of city streets, sidewalks,
highways, and bridges. OakDOT Sidewalks
Program is responsible for ensuring the safety
and accessibility of Oakland's sidewalks and
maintains a program to expedite repairs of
tree-related sidewalk damage on behalf of
disabled requestors. OakDOT Right-of-Way
Management reviews, permits and inspects
privately-constructed infrastructure projects,
often associated with redevelopment. OakDOT’s
engineering programs are also responsible for
the design of streetscape improvement projects,
which include planting street trees
Oakland Public Library has been a resource for
the City since 1878. The Main Library is located
near Lake Merritt and has 16 branches located
throughout Oakland, including the African
American Museum & Library, a Tool Lending
Library, and the Oakland History Center. Public
Works maintains the landscapes at Libraries,
including maintaining current trees and
planting new trees. The Oakland History Center
was instrumental in providing the historical
information for this Plan.
Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) is the local electric
and gas utility in Oakland. In California, all utility
providers are subject to General Order 95; Rule
35 Vegetation Management (California Public
Utilities Commission, revised 2012) and FAC-003-2
Transmission Vegetation Management (NERC),
which outline requirements for vegetation
management in utility easements. These
requirements include clearance tolerances for
trees and other vegetation growing in proximity
to overhead utilities.
The Port of Oakland oversees the Oakland
Seaport, Oakland International Airport, and
nearly 20 miles of waterfront. They manage
environmental improvement projects and
environmental regulations for all Port property.
Planting Justice is an East Oakland-based
nursery and workforce development nonprofit that specializes in food-producing plants and employing local residents and formerly
incarcerated individuals. They are partners with
the City’s Transformative Climate Communities
grant project in East Oakland.
Sogorea Te’ Land Trust is an organization of
the local Lisjan Ohlone people who are native
to the land that is now Oakland. They cultivate
rematriation of land and are the recipients of
a special land trust by the City of Oakland that
returned five acres of land back to the local native
community. Sogorea Te’ Land Trust assisted in the
development of this Urban Forest Plan.
Trees for Oakland is a volunteer-based tree
planting and tree care group based in Oakland
that helps residents plant street trees in front
of their homes and helps the City plant and
maintain young trees in Oakland's parks
West Oakland Environmental Indicators
Project is a resident led, community-based
environmental justice organization dedicated
to achieving healthy homes, healthy jobs and
healthy neighborhoods for all who live, work, learn
and play in West Oakland, California.
University of California Division of Agriculture
and Natural Resources is the cooperative
extension arm of the University of California
system that brings the power of research and
education to all 58 California counties, focusing
on agriculture, natural resources (including urban
forestry), economic growth, nutrition, and youth
development. Oakland’s local research center is
located in Half Moon Bay, California.
U.S. Forest Service’s Urban Ecosystems and
Social Dynamics Program (UESD) conducts
research on tree selection. The program partners
with municipalities to identify species that are
adapted to changing climatic conditions and
environmental stressors. Oakland’s local research
station is located in Albany, California.
118 | Section Five
Goals and Strategies
PROGRAMS GOAL 1:
Proactively manage the urban forest.
Strategy 1: Implement a comprehensive tree
pruning program for all public trees.
Strategy 2: Mitigate tree-related hazards.
Strategy 3: Enhance the visual appeal and eliminate
unsightly elements in the urban forest.
Strategy 4: Manage and reduce tree conflicts with
surrounding infrastructure.
PROGRAMS GOAL 2:
Expand and enhance urban tree
canopy.
Strategy 1: Increase tree planting in public areas.
Strategy 2: Integrate tree planting into stormwater
management systems.
Strategy 3: Promote and support tree planting on
private property.
PROGRAMS GOAL 3:
Guide, monitor, and fund the
implementation of the Urban Forest
Plan for the next 50 years.
Strategy 1: Secure sustainable funding for the
comprehensive implementation of the Urban
Forest Plan.
Strategy 2: Foster collaborative publicprivate partnerships to drive and support the implementation of the Urban Forest Plan.
Strategy 3: Integrate urban forestry considerations
into various City operations and initiatives.
Strategy 4: Regularly measure and report on the
progress of Urban Forest Plan implementation.
PEOPLE GOAL 1:
Improve community relations and
foster partnerships.
Strategy 1: Foster healthy relationships between
Parks & Tree Division and Oakland's communities.
Strategy 2: Improve transparency and public
awareness of Oakland's urban forestry efforts.
Strategy 3: Promote continuous learning about
community needs and how to support them.
Strategy 4: Support urban forestry initiatives led
by partners.
Implementation| 119
PEOPLE GOAL 2:
Strengthen community connections
to the urban forest.
Strategy 1: Optimize outdoor activities and
exposure to Oakland’s urban forest.
Strategy 2: Recognize and amplify cultural and
artistic celebrations of trees.
Strategy 3: Recognize and amplify the spiritual
and mental health benefits of trees.
Strategy 4: Co-design streetscapes and parks to
maximize the community’s connection with trees
and nature.
PEOPLE GOAL 3:
Empower community members to be
urban forestry leaders.
Strategy 1: Promote urban forestry education.
Strategy 2: Provide opportunities for community
participation in the urban forest and pathways for
green jobs.
POLICY GOAL 1:
Preserve and protect Oakland’s urban
forest.
Strategy 1: Revise and update City ordinances and
policies related to trees.
Strategy 2: Spread awareness and encourage
compliance with the Protected Tree Ordinance.
Strategy 3: Improve compliance and enforcement
of the Protected Tree Ordinance through enhanced
staff support.
POLICY GOAL 2:
Plan for trees and tree canopy.
Strategy 1: Incorporate the Urban Forest Plan into
City planning documents.
Strategy 2: Manage all public trees as green
infrastructure.
Strategy 3: Maintain and expand tree canopy with a
focus on historically underserved neighborhoods.
Strategy 4: Allocate resources for the urban forest in
City budgets and programs.
Strategy 5: Expand and protect regional tree canopy.
POLICY GOAL 3:
Plan for climate change.
Strategy 1: Prioritize trees as a climate change
solution.
Strategy 2: Enhance urban forest resilience to
climate change.
Strategy 3: Implement an ecological approach to
urban forestry.
120 | Section Five
PROGRAMS GOAL 1
Proactively manage the urban forest.
Strategy 1
Implement a comprehensive tree pruning program for all public trees.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Develop and execute a citywide tree pruning and tree planting program based on industry standards, best management practices, and environmental justice principles.
Action 2. Establish regular grid pruning cycles for street trees, trees encroaching onto roads from private property or the undeveloped right-of-way, and all park trees. Serve frontline communities first in each cycle, based on pollution levels, average tree health based on inventory data, and CalEnviroScreen. 57
Action 3. Publicly share tree pruning schedules to enhance transparency and community engagement.
Action 4. Update and maintain the tree inventory.
EQUITY PRACTICES
This is a citywide program; frontline communities shall be addressed first.
Use inclusive language to make schedules and public messaging accessible.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action 1. Scenario A: $20.8 million per year (average 2024-2030).
Scenario B: $16.9 million per year (average 2024-2030).
Action 2. Scenario A: Routine Tree Pruning Costs Only: $5.8 million per year (average 2023–2030 — Parks & Tree Division).
Scenario B: Routine Tree Pruning Costs Only): $1.4 million per year (average 2023-2030 — contractors).
Action 3. No budget implications.
Action 4. Included in Operations Scenarios A & B.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs: Dedicated Tree Pruning and Tree Removal Crew — see Scenarios A and B.
Partners:
• Tree care contractors
PROGRESS METRICS
Budget increases to establish a proactive program.
Number of trees pruned per year.
Number of instances when tree pruning schedules were shared.
Number of trees planted.
Implementation| 121
Strategy 2
Mitigate tree-related hazards.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Remove dead trees and hazardous trees/branches to minimize risks to public safety. Prioritize the backlog of tree removals identified in the inventory, beginning with frontline communities.
Action 2. Conduct pruning activities to clear trees from streetlamps, traffic signals, and improve sightlines. Serve frontline communities first.
Action 3. Perform tree clearance pruning along streets in Oakland Hills to ensure vehicle clearance. Prioritize evacuation routes first.
Action 4. Repair tree-related hazards in the public right of way, including tree-damaged sidewalk, street, and curb and gutter.
EQUITY PRACTICES
This is a citywide program; frontline communities shall be addressed first.
Use inclusive language to make schedules and public messaging accessible.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action 1. Average annual cost $3.4 – $3.7 million (Scenarios A &B).
Action 2. Scenario A: $1.29 million per year – 2024, 2025.
Scenario B: $639,000 per year — 2024, 2025, 2026.
Action 3. Scenario A: $1.38 million per year. Scenario B: $1.19 million per year.
Action 4. Costs to be determined by OakDOT. Study currently underway.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs: Dedicated Tree Pruning and Tree Removal Crew - see Scenarios A and B.
Increase in OakDOT staffing to address tree-related repairs to streets, sidewalks, and curb and gutter.
Partners:
• Tree care contractors
• OakDOT
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of dead and high-risk trees removed per year.
Number of trees pruned for clearance and improved visibility.
Number and locations of trees pruned in Oakland Hills.
Number of locations of tree-damaged sidewalk, curb and gutter, and streets that are repaired each year.
122 | Section Five
Strategy 3
Enhance the visual appeal and eliminate unsightly elements in the urban forest.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Prioritize the removal of 2,000+ known stumps to improve the aesthetic quality of public spaces. Serve frontline communities first, based on pollution levels and CalEnviroScreen.
Action 2. Replant trees in appropriate locations to replace removed stumps citywide, starting in frontline communities.
Serve frontline communities first, based on pollution levels and CalEnviroScreen.
Action 3. Implement beautification initiatives in collaboration with community groups and artists to create visually appealing tree installations and public art. In all projects, embrace, support, and celebrate Oakland’s diverse cultures. Wherever possible, hire artists and cultural strategists from Oakland’s frontline communities.
EQUITY PRACTICES
This is a citywide program; frontline communities shall be addressed first.
Embrace, support, and celebrate Oakland’s diverse cultures.
Hire artists and cultural strategists from Oakland’s frontline communities.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Actions 1 & 2. $228,760 per year for four years for contractors to address stump removal backlog
(Operations Scenarios A and B).
$235,000 per year Program Analyst I (fully burdened cost per one (1) position).
Action 3. See People Goal 1/Strategy 1 and People Goal 2/Strategy 2 for costs.
Implementation| 123
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs: See Parks & Tree Division crews identified in Scenarios A and B.
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Local artists, and art organizations
City departments:
• Race & Equity
• OakDOT
• ADA Programs Division
• OPYRD
• Cultural Affairs Commission
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of stumps removed.
Number of new trees planted and thriving.
Number of residents engaged in beautification projects. 124 | Section Five
Strategy 4
Manage and reduce tree conflicts with surrounding infrastructure.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Collaborate with OakDOT to implement strategies for addressing tree conflicts with sidewalks based on International Society of Arboriculture standards in compliance with ADA requirements.
Action 2. Update the street tree species list to ensure better compatibility between mature tree size and available planting space.
Action 3. Utilize alternative materials, such as permeable pavers and tree surrounds, to improve tree and pedestrian compatibility.
Action 4. Collaborate with OPW Sewers Department to establish improved design and planting standards for trees and sewer laterals.
Action 5. Develop a program for removing and replacing large conflicting trees growing under high voltage power lines, replacing them with smaller tree species where appropriate.
Action 6. Enforce Oakland’s street tree planting standards to minimize future conflicts with infrastructure and utilities.
EQUITY PRACTICES
This is a citywide program; frontline communities shall be addressed first.
Use inclusive language to make schedules and public messaging accessible.
Empower community members with knowledge and best
management practices that can help them achieve their
community’s goals.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Establish budget based on annual needs.
To start, establish a budget of $50,000 in Year 1 to begin to implement Action Item #3 — share costs with OakDOT.
Implementation| 125
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff: OakDOT Arboricultural Inspector (vacant position to be filled). • Program Analyst I
• Tree Supervisor II
• Administrative Analyst II
Partners:
• PG&E
City departments:
• PBD
• OakDOT ROW Management
• ADA Programs Division
PROGRESS METRICS
Updated species list.
Number of locations where alternative paving materials are used.
Development of improved design standards.
Number of problematic trees removed and replaced that conflict with utilities.
Number of plans reviewed with updated street tree planting standards.
126 | Section Five
PROGRAMS GOAL 2
Expand and enhance urban tree canopy.
Strategy 1
Increase tree planting in public areas.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Allocate additional resources, staff, and capacity to facilitate the planting of over 3,000 street trees annually, aiming for 80% street tree site stocking (suitable planting sites are planted with a tree) within seven years. Prioritize this work in frontline communities, based on pollution levels and CalEnviroScreen.
Action 2. Work with OakDOT to provide appropriate street tree species, planting strip width, and maintenance recommendations on all construction projects.
Action 3. Leverage private development projects to expand the urban forest in the public by updating the Oakland Municipal Code to require street trees for all private development projects.
Action 4. Foster community partnerships and engagement
to actively involve residents in frontline communities and throughout Oakland in tree planting initiatives and caring for young trees.
Action 5. Establish a program for young tree pruning, providing training to qualified volunteers under the guidance of City staff.
Prioritize reaching volunteers in frontline communities.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Collaborate with frontline communities on setting and
implementing neighborhood-level tree canopy goals.
Provide educational/volunteer opportunities and green job training to members of frontline communities so they may be empowered to achieve community goals.
Focus programs in frontline communities.
Implementation| 127
ESTIMATED COSTS
$6.43 million average annual costs for tree planting and post planting care in both Operations Scenarios A and B.
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs: See Operations Scenarios A and B for staffing needs. • Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Community organizations
• Local businesses
• CAL FIRE
City departments:
• Race & Equity
• OakDOT ROW Management
• ADA Programs Division
• Environmental Services Division
• Oakland Public Library
PROGRESS METRICS
Percent of suitable vacant planting sites planted in frontline communities.
Number of residents engaged.
Number of community member driven tree planting plans
developed.
128 | Section Five
Strategy 2
Integrate tree planting into stormwater management systems.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Collaborate with the Watershed & Stormwater Division staff working on the Storm Drainage Master Plan on modeling to identify where tree planting needs to be targeted to reduce localized flooding.
EQUITY PRACTICES Flooding can affect low-lying areas and highly developed land, many of which are in Oakland’s frontline communities.
ESTIMATED COSTS
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 1 for costs.
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support this action item.
Staff Needs: See Operations Scenarios A and B for staffing needs. • Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Community organizations
City departments:
• Race & Equity
• OakDOT
• Other Public Works Divisions
PROGRESS METRICS Number of trees planted and thriving in locations that help reduce stormwater runoff and reduce flooding.
Implementation| 129
Strategy 3
Promote and support tree planting on private property.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Utilize tree canopy and equity data to identify priority neighborhoods for tree planting on private property, using pollution burden and CalEnviroScreen as primary factors.
Action 2. Assist community partners in procuring and distributing climate-appropriate trees to private property owners,
encouraging them to plant trees in their yards to expand the urban tree canopy. Provide species guidance based on site suitability and the communities’ needs and values.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Focus on tree planting in Oakland’s frontline communities.
Perform extensive community engagement in Oakland’s frontline communities to spread awareness and education about tree planting and tree care.
Determine which trees best suit the community’s needs on their private property, provide opportunities and resources for them to achieve their vision.
ESTIMATED COSTS
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
Other costs to be determined.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Community organizations
• Local businesses
• CAL FIRE
City departments:
• Race & Equity
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of trees planted and thriving in locations that meet the needs of frontline communities.
Number of residents engaged.
130 | Section Five
PROGRAMS GOAL 3
Guide, monitor, and fund the implementation of the
Urban Forest Plan for the next 50 years.
Strategy 1
Secure sustainable funding for the comprehensive implementation of the Urban Forest Plan.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Utilize Table 2 (Funding sources to increase investment in Oakland’s urban forest) to identify potential external funding sources, including grants, partnerships, voluntary and mandated mitigation fees, and sponsorships.
Action 2. Develop a strategic funding plan that aligns with the budget estimates and specific needs of the Urban Forest Plan.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Funding sources may require equity focus and provided specific guidance on how that is to be achieved and measured (example:
State or Federal grant funding).
Use Department of Race & Equity guidelines in obtaining and implementing funds and services.
ESTIMATED COSTS No direct budget implications to conduct this action item. Costs are associated with implementation of Plan Action Items.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs: Parks & Tree Division Supervisor II and Administrative Analyst II to facilitate.
Partners:
City departments:
• Finance
• Other Public Works Divisions
PROGRESS METRICS Increased funding and new funding allocations.
Implementation| 131
Strategy 2
Foster collaborative public-private partnerships to drive and support the implementation of the Urban Forest Plan.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Establish an urban forestry council, committee, or equivalent body comprising representatives from relevant stakeholders, including community organizations, businesses, and government agencies. Ensure that frontline communities are well represented.
Action 2. Define clear roles and responsibilities for each partner in the implementation process, ensuring accountability and efficient progress.
Action 3. Develop a prioritized action plan with projected timelines, identifying responsible parties for each action item, and exploring opportunities for partnership engagement. Specify milestones to ensure accountability and efficient progress.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Include people of diverse backgrounds and Oakland’s frontline communities in the committee.
Make all public information accessible for accountability and transparency.
ESTIMATED COSTS Varies depending on staffing commitments and costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support each action item.
Staff Needs: Parks & Tree Division Supervisor II and Administrative Analyst II to facilitate and serve as liaisons.
Partners:
• Community organizations
• Local businesses
• CAL FIRE
City departments:
• Race & Equity
• OakDOT
• ADA Programs Division
• Oakland Public Library
PROGRESS METRICS
Establishment of an urban forestry council or committee.
Number of Urban Forestry Council meetings.
Action Plan accomplishments.
132 | Section Five
Strategy 3
Integrate urban forestry considerations into various City operations and initiatives.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Collaborate with key stakeholders and departments to explore opportunities for constructive collaboration and integration of urban forestry with urban planning, infrastructure development, and environmental initiatives to ensure alignment with the Urban Forest Plan. Specify equity indicators and objectives for all collaborative efforts.
Action 2. Advocate for the allocation of necessary resources and funding within other City departments to support urban forestry initiatives.
EQUITY PRACTICES Include equity insights, indicators, and objectives in collaborative efforts.
ESTIMATED COSTS No direct budget implications to conduct this action item. Costs are associated with implementation of Plan Action Items.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs: Parks & Tree Division Supervisor II and Administrative Analyst II to facilitate and serve as liaisons.
Partners:
City departments:
• ADA Programs Division
• City Administrator
• Finance
• OakDOT
• OPYRD
• PBD
• Other Public Works Divisions
• Race & Equity
PROGRESS METRICS
Increased funding and resources.
Number of infrastructure, development and environmental initiatives that integrate trees.
Implementation| 133
Strategy 4
Regularly measure and report on the progress of Urban Forest Plan implementation.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Prepare and distribute an annual report that provides an overview of the accomplishments, challenges, and ongoing efforts related to the Urban Forest Plan, including equity indicators for all relevant actions.
Action 2. Conduct a comprehensive citywide tree inventory every 10 years to monitor the condition and health of the urban forest.
Action 3. Analyze urban tree canopy changes every 5 years to assess the effectiveness of tree planting and preservation efforts. Include specific analysis of changes in canopy coverage in frontline communities.
EQUITY PRACTICES Include equity indicators in reporting, monitoring, and analyses.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action 1. No budget implications.
Action 2. Estimated inventory costs: $357,000 (2025), $455,633 (2030) Action 3. 2024 Estimated cost: $60,000; 2030 Estimated cost:
$66,245.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Action 1. To be developed by the Parks & Tree Division and the Urban Forest Plan Implementation Team.
Action 2.
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support this action item.
Staff Needs: Consultant oversight; Consultant can perform tree inventory.
Action 3.
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support this action item.
Staff Needs: Consultant oversight; Consultant to conduct UTC.
PROGRESS METRICS
Action 1. Development of annual report.
Action 2. Tree inventory updates completed in 2025 and 2030.
Action 3. Urban tree canopy assessment updated in 2024 and 2030. 134 | Section Five
PEOPLE GOAL 1
Improve community relations and foster partnerships.
Strategy 1
Foster healthy relationships between the Parks & Tree Division and Oakland's communities.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Foster healthy relationships between the Parks & Tree Division and Oakland's communities through active participation in community events or meetings and direct engagement
with residents, neighborhood associations, and environmental organizations to understand their needs, concerns, and
suggestions related to trees. Prioritize this work in frontline communities.
Action 2. Provide support or guidance to City departments and community members seeking assistance with tree-related
issues, such as tree planting, pruning, or removal. Use inclusive language and appropriate translation of materials for frontline communities.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Focus engagement efforts within Oakland’s frontline communities.
Make information accessible to all, consider what communication techniques and formats work best for different communities and adapt to those needs.
ESTIMATED COSTS
$50/participant (transportation).
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs. $145,000 City support of local partners and non-profits.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Community organizations
City departments:
• Oakland Housing and Community Development
• Oakland Public Library
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of meetings attended and presentations given.
Number of residents supported.
Implementation| 135
Strategy 2
Improve transparency and public awareness of Oakland's
urban forestry efforts.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Maintain and enhance the City’s tree program website, regularly updating it with progress updates, maintenance schedules (when funded), and relevant information.
Action 2. Utilize social media platforms to share accessible special announcements, upcoming tree-related events, and educational content about the benefits of trees.
Action 3. Develop and make available an interactive Oakland tree map that allows the public to access information about the location, species, and condition of trees in the city.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Make information accessible to all, consider what communication techniques and formats work best for different communities and adapt to those needs.
Remove barriers to access and focus communication efforts in frontline communities.
Make public Oakland’s tree equity disparities, utilize equity indicators as a means of making equity disparities visible and understandable to the public.
ESTIMATED COSTS See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Public engagement/ advertising/ marketing consultant
City departments:
• ITD, GIS Division
• City Administrator's Office
PROGRESS METRICS Number of website visits/social media views. 136 | Section Five
Strategy 3
Promote continuous learning about community needs and how to support them.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Foster ongoing collaboration and communication between the Parks & Tree Division and other City departments through regular meetings, forums, and reporting mechanisms.
Action 2. Engage with community members, neighborhood
associations, and environmental organizations to gain insights into their evolving needs and priorities regarding trees and urban forestry, prioritizing frontline communities.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Work closely with Oakland’s Department of Race & Equity to shape departmental objectives and methods for providing service.
Take an active listening role to Oakland’s frontline community members.
ESTIMATED COSTS See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Community organizations
• Various City departments
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of meetings with other City departments.
Feedback from community partners.
Implementation| 137
Strategy 4
Support urban forestry initiatives led by partners.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Support urban forestry initiatives led by partners by providing dedicated City staff to guide and support the implementation of community-level urban forestry grants and projects. Prioritize efforts in Oakland’s frontline communities who are in greatest need of City support. Work with community and internal partners to include feasible protections against displacement that could result from urban forestry projects in frontline communities.
Action 2. Collaborate with community organizations to facilitate tree giveaways and promote tree planting and care on private property, encouraging residents to actively participate in greening their neighborhoods. Prioritize efforts in frontline communities who are in greatest need of City support and collaborate with community leaders on what types of programs or services may best suit their community’s needs.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Focus these efforts in Oakland’s frontline communities who are in greatest need of City support.
Take a humble approach to learning from community leaders what types of programs or services may best suit their community’s needs.
ESTIMATED COSTS
$25,000 per year expenses.
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Community organizations
• Residents
City departments:
• Oakland’s Adopt a Spot
• Oakland Public Library
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of grants/projects completed.
Number of tree giveaways and related activities.
138 | Section Five
PEOPLE GOAL 2
Strengthen community connections to the
urban forest.
Strategy 1
Optimize outdoor activities and exposure to Oakland’s urban forest.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Work with community partners to optimize outdoor activities & exposure to Oakland's urban forest. Support and, where feasible, organize field trips to parks and urban forest areas for schools, community organizations, and residents, providing transportation options to encourage participation. Collaborate with Oakland Park & Recreation and Youth Development
(OPYRD) and other partners to develop inclusive tree-related programming and recreation activities, such as guided nature walks, tree identification workshops, and outdoor fitness classes.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Focus efforts in frontline communities.
Identify barriers and enhance accessibility.
Co-create programs that are best suited for community members.
ESTIMATED COSTS See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support this action item.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Local youth organizations
City departments:
• OPYRD
• Oakland Public Library
• OUSD
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of outdoor activities.
Number of participants.
Implementation| 139
Strategy 2
Recognize and amplify cultural and artistic celebrations of trees.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Recognize and amplify cultural & artistic celebrations of trees by engaging local artists and cultural strategists to contribute artwork, murals, public service announcements (PSAs), and community relations efforts that highlight the value of trees in Oakland. Collaborate with Oakland’s Cultural Affairs and local artists to commission and install public art that celebrates trees and their cultural significance, while embracing, supporting, and celebrating Oakland’s diverse cultures. Wherever possible, hire artists and cultural strategists from Oakland’s frontline communities.
Action 2. Equitably support community groups in celebrating trees according to their cultural traditions by providing materials, resources, and public spaces for their activities, prioritizing activities in and serving frontline communities.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Embrace, support, and celebrate Oakland’s diverse cultures.
Focus on frontline communities and community members.
Hire artists and cultural strategists from Oakland’s frontline communities.
Use language and style accessible to Oakland community
members.
ESTIMATED COSTS
$50,000 to $75,000 per year to support cultural strategists’ and artists’ stipends and art installation costs.
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Cultural Affairs Commission
• Local artists, and art organizations
City departments:
• Race & Equity
• OPYRD
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of partnerships created.
Tree-related art installations installed; events hosted. 140 | Section Five
Strategy 3
Recognize and amplify the spiritual and mental health benefits of trees.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Promote nature walks, hiking, and "forest bathing" as healthy activities that enhance well-being and foster a deeper connection to the urban forest. Collaborate with local wellness organizations and mental health professionals to develop programs that utilize the therapeutic benefits of spending time in nature.
Focus efforts in frontline communities, especially where access to mental and physical health services are limited. Remove access barriers and integrate lessons from Indigenous and other frontline communities.
Action 2. Support land rematriation efforts of Indigenous peoples to honor their connection with the land and trees.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Focus efforts in frontline communities, especially where access to mental and physical health services are limited.
Remove barriers to access for these types of health services.
Take an active listening role in relationships with Oakland’s Indigenous cultures and work towards supporting them.
Practice cultural humility and reflect on lessons that can be learned from Indigenous wisdom.
Implementation| 141
ESTIMATED COSTS
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
Other costs to be determined.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Local wellness organizations and mental health professionals • Indigenous peoples
• Various City departments
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of participants in nature walks, hiking, and forest bathing.
Number of collaborations with local wellness organizations and mental health professionals.
Instances of support provided to Indigenous people/groups. 142 | Section Five
Strategy 4
Co-design streetscapes and parks to maximize the community’s connection with trees and nature.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Assign Parks & Tree Division staff to actively participate in planning projects led by PBD, OakDOT, and other City departments to provide expertise and guidance for incorporating trees into streetscape designs.
Action 2. Collaborate with local artists and businesses (prioritizing those in frontline communities) to design and install tree guard benches around street trees, creating inviting spaces for residents to rest and enjoy the urban forest.
Action 3. Prioritize the use of native plants and pollinator gardens in the urban forest where appropriate, enhancing biodiversity and attracting wildlife, and maximizing green infrastructure for stormwater management, nature access, and pollution mitigation. Prioritize implementation in frontline communities.
Action 4. Repurpose downed trees as logs in sitting circles and gathering places in parks, creating natural seating areas that blend with the surrounding environment.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Consider and acknowledge how frontline community members have been disproportionately hurt by city planning decisions and prioritize ways to address and counteract these inequities in future decisions.
Use art and designs to celebrate and amplify cultural visibility of frontline communities.
Foster partnerships in frontline communities to understand more about their needs and objectives.
Focus programming and actions in frontline communities
according to their needs and objectives.
Implementation| 143
ESTIMATED COSTS
$225,000 per year in expenses for tree guard benches, native plants and repurposed logs.
$241,000 per year for one (1) Arboricultural Inspector.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
• One Arboricultural inspector
Partners:
• Local artists
• City departments
• ADA Programs Division
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of planning projects successfully integrating trees.
Number of artists participating.
Number of tree guard benches installed.
Number of native plant pollinator gardens installed.
Number of downed trees reused.
144 | Section Five
PEOPLE GOAL 3
Empower community members to be
urban forestry leaders.
Strategy 1
Promote urban forestry education.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Develop a comprehensive community tree maintenance and care training program that includes certification upon completion to equip community members with the necessary skills and knowledge to effectively care for trees. In creating and implementing this program, pursue partnerships with OUSD high schools, community colleges, and community groups
serving frontline communities, including BIPOC and immigrant communities.
Action 2. Collaborate with existing community groups and organizations (prioritizing those in frontline communities) to integrate urban forestry trainings, workshops, or school functions tailored to their specific needs and interests.
Action 3. Establish partnerships with educational institutions such as Merritt College and the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) to connect community members to additional educational opportunities and resources in the field of urban forestry.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Focus community tree care on recently planted trees in frontline communities.
Identify existing urban forestry-related community groups working in Oakland’s frontline communities and work to support them.
ESTIMATED COSTS
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
Other costs to be determined.
Implementation| 145
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Community organizations
• OUSD
• Merritt College
• ISA
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of residents attaining certification.
Number of organizations participating in training.
Number of partnerships established.
146 | Section Five
Strategy 2
Provide opportunities for community participation in the urban forest and pathways for green jobs.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Support and facilitate urban forestry volunteer programs, including tree planting and young tree pruning initiatives.
Provide necessary tools, training, and ongoing guidance to ensure the success of these programs. Prioritize this work in frontline communities.
Action 2. Identify and support green job career pathways in the urban forestry sector, offering employment opportunities for community members interested in pursuing tree care and
maintenance careers. Establish partnerships with educational institutions such as Merritt College and the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) to connect community members to
additional educational opportunities and resources in urban forestry.
Action 3. Collaborate with partners to develop a work program for individuals who were formerly incarcerated or experiencing homelessness in performing specific tree care and maintenance tasks in City parks.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Focus volunteer programs in Oakland’s frontline communities.
Focus green job training and creation opportunities in Oakland’s frontline communities.
Provide work opportunities to Oakland’s frontline community members who have been negatively affected by the criminal justice system.
ESTIMATED COSTS
$200,000 annually to pay and train community members to perform tree work (four (4) community members @ $50,000 each per year).
$50,000 per year for work force development program expenses.
Implementation| 147
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
• Tree Supervisor II
• Administrative Analyst II
Partners:
• Merritt College
• International Society of Arboriculture
• Other educational institutions and groups
City departments:
• Race & Equity
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of events and participants.
Number of green jobs created.
Number of individuals hired.
Number of individuals trained.
148 | Section Five
POLICY GOAL 1
Preserve and protect Oakland’s urban forest.
Strategy 1
Revise and update City ordinances and policies related to trees.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Revise and update the Protected Tree Ordinance and other relevant tree ordinances to align with the values and strategies outlined in the adopted Urban Forest Plan. Ensure that revisions reflect community input and address Oakland's current needs and identified challenges, including climate change.
Include a comprehensive community engagement process to gather input and feedback about the Protected Tree Ordinance.
Incorporate community perspectives and environmental justice principles into any proposed updates to the maximum extent feasible, along with considerations for mitigating and adapting to climate change as outlined in Oakland's 2030 Equitable Climate Action Plan.
Action 2. Streamline and enhance the enforcement mechanisms of the Protected Tree Ordinance, making it more practical and effective in preserving and protecting trees within the City.
Include practices for equitable enforcement, developed in partnership with the Department of Race & Equity.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Ensure that community engagement processes follow Oakland’s Race & Equity guidelines.
Though the Protected Tree Ordinance applies to all trees citywide, ensure that engagement efforts include Oakland’s frontline communities.
Consider ways to incorporate equity considerations in the Protected Tree Ordinances, such as redirecting collected fees or fines towards expanding tree canopy in Oakland’s frontline communities.
ESTIMATED COSTS
$100,000 for a consultant to assist in ordinance revisions and development.
$50,000 community engagement.
Implementation| 149
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
• Tree Supervisor II
• Administrative Analyst II
Partners:
• Community groups and organizations
City departments:
• Race & Equity
• Other departments (to be determined)
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of community engagement participants.
Revised ordinance.
150 | Section Five
Strategy 2
Spread awareness and encourage compliance with the
Protected Tree Ordinance.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Engage community artists to design public service announcements (PSAs) that raise awareness about the
importance of protecting trees. Utilize various city resources and platforms to disseminate these PSAs and reach a wide audience, ensuring frontline communities are both represented in the content and the distribution. (See People Goal 2, Strategy 2, Action Item 1.)
Action 2. Work with relevant City departments to develop strategies to promote compliance with the Protected Tree Ordinance. Focus on improving the tree removal permitting process and establishing consistent design and construction standards that account for the protection of trees.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Use language and style accessible to Oakland community
members.
Hire artists and cultural strategists from Oakland’s frontline communities.
ESTIMATED COSTS
$50,000 per year per cultural strategist.
See People Goal 1/Strategy 1 for other costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Artists
• Various City departments
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of PSAs.
Number of interactions and percentage of their objectives achieved.
Implementation| 151
Strategy 3
Improve compliance and enforcement of the Protected Tree Ordinance through enhanced staff support.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Increase the staffing of Arboricultural Inspectors to enable thorough review of plans, regular inspections of treerelated work, and prompt responses to reports of illegal tree removals. This increased capacity will help ensure compliance with the Protected Tree Ordinance.
Action 2. Restore and utilize Parks Enforcement Officers or similar enforcement staff positions to actively enforce the Protected Tree Ordinance. These positions will play a vital role in monitoring and reporting tree-related violations and taking appropriate enforcement actions.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Provide translation for public noticing about tree removals to make more accessible.
Spread policy awareness throughout Oakland’s communities to encourage compliance.
Utilize collected fees and fines to expand tree canopy in Oakland’s disadvantaged communities.
ESTIMATED COSTS
$578,566 annually for 2 new inspectors.
$750,000 annually for 3 enforcement officers.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
• Two Inspectors
Partners:
• Enforcement officers
PROGRESS METRICS Number of staff hired.
152 | Section Five
POLICY GOAL 2
Plan for trees and tree canopy.
Strategy 1
Incorporate the Urban Forest Plan into City planning documents.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Include the goals, strategies, and actions of the Urban Forest Plan in the writing and revision of relevant City Plans, including the General Plan, Neighborhood and Specific Area Plans, Equitable Climate Action Plan, and Vegetation Management Plan.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Tree Planting and maintenance are practical and relatively affordable ways of working towards Oakland’s social, environmental, and climate justice goals.
ESTIMATED COSTS No budget implications.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs: Current Parks & Tree Division staff.
Partners:
City departments:
• PBD
• OakDOT
• Race & Equity
• Other Public Works divisions
• OPYRD
PROGRESS METRICS Number of plans integrating the Plan.
Implementation| 153
Strategy 2
Manage all public trees as green infrastructure.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Implement routine pruning for all trees in the developed right of way based on best management practices and funding availability.
Action 2. Integrate trees strategically into City plans and designs to maximize their ecosystem benefits, such as providing shade, capturing stormwater, and improving air quality.
EQUITY PRACTICES
By pruning all public trees, the City will reduce tree canopy inequity by providing service to communities who have fewer means to plant or maintain trees themselves.
Frontline communities are categorically more threatened by the effects of climate change and air pollution. Taking these actions will protect their health and well-being.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Action 1. Average annual cost (excluding tree planting and stump removal).
Scenario A: $14.25 million; Scenario B: $ 10.42 million.
Action 2. No budget implications.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs: See Operations Scenarios A and B.
Partners:
City departments:
• PBD
• OakDOT
• Race & Equity
• ADA Programs Division
• Other Public Works divisions
• OPYRD
PROGRESS METRICS
Number of trees pruned and removed each year.
Number of plans integrating trees.
154 | Section Five
Strategy 3
Maintain and expand tree canopy with a focus on historically underserved neighborhoods.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Adopt a no net loss citywide tree canopy goal.
Action 2. Establish neighborhood-specific tree canopy goals that consider both the quantity and quality of tree coverage, particularly in neighborhoods affected by historical redlining/ frontline communities.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Maintaining tree canopy citywide and increasing tree canopy in neighborhoods that were historically redlined will reduce some consequences of historically racist and inequitable policies.
Consider tradeoffs between affordable housing development and tree canopy.
Plan for and mitigate unintended consequences of gentrification when creating improvements to communities.
Involve community partners in management decisions.
ESTIMATED COSTS
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
Other costs to be determined.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Community organizations
City departments:
• PBD
• Race & Equity
PROGRESS METRICS
Establishing area-specific canopy goals.
Number of neighborhoods with canopy goals.
Canopy percentage changes after each future urban tree canopy assessment.
Implementation| 155
Strategy 4
Allocate resources for the urban forest in City budgets and programs.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Incorporate urban forest strategies, including tree preservation, planting, and maintenance, into the budgets and funding streams of City planning, design, construction, and other related projects.
Action 2. Implement requirements for new developments to include street tree planting and landscape components or, when not possible, contribute in-lieu fees to a City Tree Fund that funds planting activities in frontline communities.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Include equity-focused funding applications in budgets.
Prioritize tree planting and maintenance in Oakland’s frontline communities.
Direct City Tree Fund collections towards planting trees in Oakland’s disadvantaged communities.
ESTIMATED COSTS
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
Other costs to be determined.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: These actions may lead to future funding needs and opportunities.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
• Current Parks & Tree Division staff
Partners:
City departments:
• PBD
• OakDOT
• Race & Equity
PROGRESS METRICS
Development of tree preservation, planting and maintenance standards.
Number of times these are incorporated into City budgets and programs.
Development of tree planting requirements and fee structure for in-lieu fees.
Annual count of trees planted and in-lieu fees collected from City projects.
• ADA Programs Division
• Other Public Works divisions
• OPYRD
156 | Section Five
Strategy 5
Expand and protect regional tree canopy.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Collaborate with regional partners to promote and maintain tree canopy coverage beyond Oakland's boundaries.
Action 2. Share urban forest data with research partners to contribute to broader knowledge and utilization of Oakland's urban forestry practices.
EQUITY PRACTICES
When working with regional partners, ensure that equity is included in collaboration efforts, research, and analysis.
Share insights and information that can be used to address equity and environmental justice issues.
ESTIMATED COSTS See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: These actions may lead to future funding needs and opportunities.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
• Current Parks & Tree Division staff
Partners:
• Regional partners
City departments:
• ITD
PROGRESS METRICS
Identify and list collaborations with nearby cities, counties, land managers.
Description of data shared with the U.S. Forest Service, University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, and other research entities.
Implementation| 157
POLICY GOAL 3
Plan for climate change.
Strategy 1
Prioritize trees as a climate change solution.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Continue to highlight and maximize the role of Oakland's urban forest in Oakland's climate policies and goals, emphasizing the role of trees in mitigating and adapting to climate change.
Identify and develop frameworks and metrics to incorporate urban canopy and proactive tree maintenance into the
City's greenhouse gas (GHG) accounting to provide a clearer assessment of progress toward Oakland's 2045 Carbon neutral target.
EQUITY PRACTICES Equity is centered in Oakland’s climate change policies, as depicted in the Equitable Climate Action Plan.
ESTIMATED COSTS See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
• Current Parks & Tree Division staff
Partners:
City departments:
• PBD
• OakDOT
• Race & Equity
• Other Public Works divisions
• OPYRD
PROGRESS METRICS Number of policies and goals set that recognize the role of trees in mitigating climate change.
158 | Section Five
Strategy 2
Enhance urban forest resilience to climate change.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Regularly update the street tree species list based on climate modeling and drought tolerance research to ensure the selection of suitable tree species.
Action 2. Monitor and assess regional and local trends in tree stress and mortality caused by climate change, taking appropriate actions to mitigate these effects.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Making the urban forest more resilient will help mitigate its vulnerability to climate change, therefore protecting those who are most vulnerable to climate change.
ESTIMATED COSTS $15,000 for consultant services.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Staff Needs:
• Tree Supervisor II
• Administrative Analyst II
Partners:
• Consultants
• International Society of Arboriculture
• Cal Poly SelecTree
• California ReScape
• University of California Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources
PROGRESS METRICS
Review tree list annually and update as needed.
Track pests and tree die off.
Implementation| 159
Strategy 3
Implement an ecological approach to urban forestry.
ACTION ITEM
Action 1. Follow the guidelines of the Alameda County Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and incorporate principles from the California ReScape program into urban forestry design and maintenance practices to reduce resource consumption and maximize environmental benefits.
Action 2. Promote and support urban forestry educational opportunities led by partners to increase awareness and knowledge. Focus outreach, awareness, and opportunities in Oakland’s frontline communities. Work with educational, vocational, and other partners to explore opportunities for integrating educational programs with green jobs training. Tailor programs to benefit frontline communities.
Action 3. Encourage and facilitate the recycling of urban forestry byproducts, such as dead trees, brush, and leaves, into mulch or other useful resources.
EQUITY PRACTICES
Focus outreach, awareness, and opportunities in Oakland’s frontline communities.
Consider ways to turn educational opportunities into green jobs training.
Make opportunities accessible, remove barriers for participation, provide translation services.
Tailor programs to benefit frontline communities.
ESTIMATED COSTS
Other costs to be determined.
See Programs Goal 1/Strategy 3 for Program Analyst I costs.
IMPLEMENTATION
NOTES/PARTNERS
Funding: Grant funding may be available to support action items.
Staff Needs:
• Program Analyst I
Partners:
• Community organizations
• International Society of Arboriculture
• Cal Poly SelecTree
• California ReScape
PROGRESS METRICS
Successful incorporation of California ReScape principles.
Number of educational opportunities supported.
Quantity of re-used byproducts.
160 |Acknowledgments
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Thank you to the City departments, organizations, and individuals that helped in creating the Oakland Urban Forest Plan.
ADA Programs Division
Dr. Ayodele Nzinga, Oakland Poet Laureate
CAL FIRE Urban & Community Forestry
California Interfaith Power & Light
Common Vision
Davey Resource Group
David Muffly
Eastside Arts Alliance
Fair Forests Consulting, LLC
Forest & Tree
Oakland City Administrator’s Office
Oakland City Attorney’s Office
Oakland Community Engagement Working Group
Oakland Cultural Affairs Commission
Oakland Department of Housing & Community
Development
Oakland Department of Race & Equity
Oakland Department of Transportation
Oakland Department of Workplace & Employment
Standards
Oakland Fire Department
Oakland Information Technology Department
Oakland Parks & Recreation Advisory Committee
Oakland Parks and Recreation Foundation
Oakland Parks, Recreation, & Youth Development
Oakland Planning & Building
Oakland Public Library
Oakland Public Works
San Francisco Public Works
Sogorea Te’ Land Trust
Trees for Oakland
University of California Division of Agriculture and
Natural Resources
USDA Forest Service Pacific
Southwest Research Station
Acknowledgments | 161
This Urban Forest Plan is a product of an urban and community forestry grant funded by CAL FIRE and California Climate Investments (CCI).
c Volunteers planting trees on Skyline Boulevard. Credit: Keola Semitekol 162 | Appendices
APPENDIX A:
Operations Scenarios
SCENARIO A BUDGET SUMMARY
Budget Summary
SCENARIO A: 7-Year Proactive Street & Park Tree Management - City Crews and Minor Contractor Support*
YEAR 1 YEAR 2** YEAR 3**
Tree Pruning (5 Crews)
ANNUAL Tree Pruning Costs $6,511,245 $6,836,808 $7,178,648 ANNUAL Number of Trees Pruned 14,024 14,024 11,572
Tree Removal (2 Crews)
ANNUAL Tree Removal Costs $2,928,509 $3,074,934 $3,228,681 ANNUAL Number of Trees Removed 1,584 1,562 1,865
Tree Planting and Stump Removal (7 crews)
ANNUAL Tree Planting and Stump Removal Costs $5,632,199 $5,903,309 $6,198,474 ANNUAL Number of Trees Planted 3,133 3,133 3,133
ANNUAL Number of Stumps Removed 2,201 2,201 2,201
Tree Inspections (4 Inspectors)
ANNUAL Tree Inspection Costs $994,830 $1,044,572 $1,096,800 ANNUAL Number of Inspections 1,515 1,515 1,515
Floating Crew
ANNUAL Floating Crew Costs $543,371 $570,539 $599,066
Administration and Operational Support (2 staff)
ANNUAL Administration and Operational Support Costs $1,275,823 $1,339,614 $1,406,595 Data Management and Updates
Tree Inventory Update (Years 2 and 7) $- $357,000 $-
Urban Tree Canopy Assessment Years 1 and 6 $60,000 $- $- TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS $17,945,977 $19,126,775 $19,708,264
( ) = Number of Staff/Crews
*REALISTIC CONDITIONS: Based on 220 work days per year (accounting for crew vacation, sick, holiday time, other missed work days, and reassignment to other tasks (i.e. storms, debris pick-up) Appendices | 163
YEAR 4** YEAR 5** YEAR 6** YEAR 7** Total Costs & Trees Over 7 Years $7,537,580 $7,914,459 $8,310,182 $8,725,692 $53,014,615 11,572 11,572 11,572 11,572 85,910
$3,390,115 $3,559,621 $3,737,602 $3,924,482 $23,843,942 1,264 1,264 1,264 1,264 10,067
$6,508,398 $6,575,766 $6,904,554 $7,263,183 $44,985,882 3,133 3,133 3,133 3,133 21,929
1,795 1,264 1,264 1,264 12,190
$1,151,640 $1,209,222 $1,269,683 $1,333,168 $8,099,916
1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 10,605
$629,019 $660,470 $693,494 $728,169 $4,424,128
$1,476,925 $1,550,771 $1,628,309 $1,709,725 $10,387,762 $- $- $- $455,633 $812,633
$- $- $66,245 $- $126,245
$20,693,677 $21,470,309 $22,610,070 $24,140,050 $145,695,123 **After Year 1 includes 5% annual cost increase
***Tree Planting costs include the cost of tree purchase ($200/tree) 164 | Appendices
SCENARIO B BUDGET SUMMARY
Budget Summary
SCENARIO B: 7-Year Proactive Street & Park Tree Management - Hybrid: City Crews* & Contractors
YEAR 1 YEAR 2** YEAR 3**
Tree Pruning
ANNUAL Tree Pruning Costs — City Crews (1 crews) $1,745,110 $1,832,366 $1,923,984 ANNUAL Number of Trees Pruned City Crews 4,690 4,690 4,690 ANNUAL Tree Pruning Costs —Contractors $1,201,440 $1,261,512 $1,324,587 ANNUAL Number of Trees Pruned Contractors 8,517 8,517 8,517 TOTAL ANNUAL Tree Pruning Costs $2,946,550 $3,093,877 $3,248,571 TOTAL ANNUAL Number of Trees Pruned 13,207 13,207 13,207 Tree Removal
ANNUAL Tree Removal Costs — City Crews (2) $2,698,558 $2,833,485 $2,975,160 ANNUAL Number of Trees Removed City Crews 1,757 1,757 1,757 ANNUAL Tree Removal & Stump Costs — Contractors*** $500,000 $525,000 $551,250 ANNUAL Number of Trees Removed Contractors 341 90 90
ANNUAL Number of Stumps Removed by Contractor 341 90 90 TOTAL ANNUAL Tree Removal Costs $3,198,558 $3,358,485 $3,526,410 TOTAL ANNUAL Number of Trees Removed 2,098 1,847 1,847
Tree Planting and Stump Removal
Contractor Support — Tree Planting Site Prep (concrete removal, etc.) assumes 65% of vacant planting sites are in tree wells (based on 2022 inventory
$2,443,517 $2,565,693 $2,693,978
Contractor Support — Stump Removals
(Inventory backlog — Years 1–4) $212,300 $222,915 $234,061 ANNUAL Tree Planting & Stump Removal Costs $5,127,558 $5,383,936 $5,653,133 ANNUAL Post Planting Tree Care Costs $504,641 $519,373 $545,341 TOTAL ANNUAL Tree Planting and Stump Removal Costs $5,632,199 $5,903,309 $6,198,474 TOTAL ANNUAL Number of Trees Planted 3,133 3,133 3,133
TOTAL ANNUAL Number of Stumps Removed 2,201 2,201 2,201 Tree Inspections (4 Inspectors)
ANNUAL Tree Inspection Costs $994,830 $1,044,572 $1,096,800 ANNUAL Number of Inspections 1,515 1,515 1,515
Floating Crew
ANNUAL Floating Crew Costs $543,371 $570,539 $599,066
Administration and Operational Support (5 staff)
ANNUAL Administration and Operational Support Costs $1,275,823 $1,339,614 $1,406,595 Data Management and Updates
Tree Inventory Update (Years 2 and 7) $- $357,000 $-
Urban Tree Canopy Assessment Years 1 and 6 $60,000 $- $- TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS $14,651,330 $15,667,397 $16,075,917
Appendices | 165
YEAR 4** YEAR 5** YEAR 6** YEAR 7** Total Costs & Trees Over 7 Years
$2,020,183 $2,121,192 $2,227,252 $2,338,615
$23,990,835
3,056 3,056 3,056 3,056
$1,390,817 $1,460,358 $1,533,375 $1,316,524
8,517 8,517 8,517 8,517
$3,411,000 $3,581,550 $3,760,627 $3,948,659
11,572 11,572 11,572 11,572 85,910
$3,123,918 $3,280,114 $3,444,119 $3,616,325
$26,042,683
1,757 809 809 809
$578,813 $607,753 $638,141 $670,048
90 90 90 90
90 90 90 90
$3,702,730 $3,887,867 $4,082,260 $4,286,373
1,847 899 899 899 10,337
$2,828,677 $2,970,110 $3,118,616 $3,274,547
$44,985,882
$245,764 $- $- $-
$5,935,789 $5,974,527 $6,273,253 $6,586,916
$572,608 $601,239 $631,301 $676,267
$6,508,398 $6,575,766 $6,904,554 $7,263,183
3,133 3,133 3,133 3,133 21,929
1,795 1,264 1,264 1,264 12,190
$1,151,640 $1,209,222 $1,269,683 $1,333,168 $8,099,916
1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 10,605
$629,019 $660,470 $693,494 $728,169 $4,424,128
$1,476,925 $1,550,771 $1,628,309 $1,709,725 $10,387,762 $- $- $- $455,633 $812,633
$- $- $66,245 $- $126,245
$16,879,712 $17,465,646 $18,405,173 $19,724,908 $118,870,083 ( ) = Number of Staff/
Crews
* REALISTIC
CONDITIONS: Based
on 220 work days per
year (accounting for
crew vacation, sick,
holiday time, other
missed work days, and
reassignment to other
tasks (i.e. storms,
debris pick-up)
**After Year 1 includes
5% annual cost
increase
***Tree Removal
costs for contractors
includes the cost for
stump removal
****City Tree Planting
costs include the
cost of tree purchase
($200/tree)
166 | Appendices
SCENARIO A STAFFING AND EQUIPMENT
SCENARIO A: 7-Year Proactive Street & Park Tree Management - City Crews with Minor Contractor Support
City of Oakland Tree Services OPERATIONS STAFF
Tree Pruning # of Staff Tree Planting and Care # of Staff Tree Trimmer 15 Tree Worker 6
Tree Trimmer Crew Leader 5 Park Attendant (Part-Time) 11 Tree Worker 5 Tree Supervisor I 2
Park Attendant (Part-Time) 5 Total TREE PLANTING & STUMP STAFF 19 Tree Supervisor I 2 Total Tree Planting/Care Crews 7
Total TREE PRUNING STAFF 32
3 Tree Planting Crews - Tree Planting crew = 2 Tree Workers + 1 parttime Park Attendant) / 4 City Post Planting Care Crews - 1 crew = 2 part-time Park Attendants)
Total Tree Pruning Crews 5
1 crew = 3 Tree Trimmers + 1 Tree Trimmer Crew
Leader + 1 Tree Worker + 1 Park Attendant
(part-time)
Floating Crew # of Staff
Tree Worker 2
Park Attendant (Part-Time) 1
Total Floating Staff 3
1 crew = (3 staff) 2 Tree Workers + 1 part-time Park Attendant Tree Inspections # of Staff
Tree Removal # of Staff Arboricultural Inspector 4
Tree Trimmer 4 Total TREE INSPECTIONS STAFF 4
Tree Trimmer Crew Leader 2 Total Tree inspection Crews 4 Tree Worker 2 1 crew = (1 staff): 1 Arboricultural Inspector Park Attendant (Part-Time) 1
Tree Supervisor I 1 Administration & Operational
Support Staff # of Staff
Total TREE REMOVAL STAFF 10 Tree Supervisor II 1
Total Tree Removal Crews 2 Administrative Analyst II 1
1 crew = 2 Tree Trimmer + 1 Tree Trimmer Crew Leader
+ 1 Tree Worker+ 1 park-time Park Attendant
Program Analyst I
(Urban Forestry Ambassador) 2
Administrative Assistant II 1
Total ADMINISTRATION STAFF 5
Tree Care Contractors Activities
Tree Removal (emergency tree removals, large tree removals (>28"DBH), and storm response) Tree Planting Site Prep
Stump Removal (inventory backlog)
Appendices | 167
City of Oakland Tree Services EQUIPMENT (ALL ACTIVITIES) Equipment Quantity
Chainsaw (Tree Pruning and Removal) 28
Aerial Lift (Bucket Truck) (55' and 75') (Tree Removal) 1 F550 with w/ Altec (AT37g) - 37' Aerial Lift (Tree Pruning) 5 Chipper (Tree Pruning and Removal) 7
Chipper Truck (Tree Pruning and Removal) 7
Knuckle Boom Truck Crane (Tree Pruning and Removal) 2
F700 Flatbed Dump Truck (Tree Removal) 2
F350 Dump Body (Pick-up Truck) (Tree Pruning, Tree Removal and Tree Planting) 10 Stump Grinder (Tree Planting and Stump Grinding) 3
Pick-up Truck (All Activities) 14
Field Computer/Tablet (All Activities) 27
Water Tank 4
Staff Summary
Tree Trimmer 19
Tree Trimmer Crew Leader 7
Tree Supervisor I 5
Tree Worker 15
Park Attendant (Part-Time) 18
Arboricultural Inspector 4
Administrative Analyst II 1
Tree Supervisor II 1
Administrative Assistant II 1
Program Analyst I (Urban Forestry Ambassador) 2
Total STAFF 73
168 | Appendices
SCENARIO B STAFFING AND EQUIPMENT
SUMMARY OPERATIONAL NEEDS
SCENARIO B: 7-Year Proactive Street & Park Tree Management - Hybrid: City Crews & Contractors
City of Oakland Tree Services OPERATIONS STAFF
Tree Pruning # of Staff Tree Planting and Care # of Staff Tree Trimmer 3 Tree Worker 6
Tree Trimmer Crew Leader 1 Park Attendant (Part-Time) 11 Tree Worker 1 Tree Supervisor I 2
Park Attendent (Part Time) 1 Total TREE PLANTING & STUMP STAFF 19 Tree Supervisor I 2 Total Tree Pruning Crews 7
Total TREE PRUNING STAFF 8 1 crew = (3 staff) 2 Tree Worker + 1 part-time park attendant + 4 City Post Planting Care Crews (1 crew = 2 part-time Park Attendants) Total Tree Pruning Crews 1
1 crew = 3 Tree Trimmer + 1 Tree Trimmer Crew Leader
+ 1 Tree Worker + 1 Park Attendant Floating Crew # of Staff Tree Worker 2
Park Attendant (Part-Time) 1
Total Floating Staff 3
1 crew = (3 staff) 2 Tree Workers + 1 part-time Park Attendant Tree Removal # of Staff Tree Inspections # of Staff
Tree Trimmer 4 Arboricultural Inspectors 4
Tree Trimmer Crew Leader 2 Total TREE INSPECTIONS STAFF 4 Tree Worker 2 Total Tree inspection Crews 4
Tree Supervisor I 2 1 crew = (1 staff): 1 Arboricultural Inspector Park Attendant (Part-Time) 2
Total TREE REMOVAL STAFF 12 Administration & Operational Support Staff # of Staff
Total Tree Removal Crews 2 Tree Supervisor II 1
1 crew = 2 Tree Trimmer + 1 Tree Trimmer Crew
Leader + 1 Tree Worker+ 1 park-time park attendant Administrative Analyst II 1 Program Analyst I
(Urban Forestry Ambassador) 2
Administrative Assistant II 1
Total ADMINISTRATION STAFF 5
Tree Care Contractors Activities
Tree Pruning (Routine Pruning)
Tree Removal (emergency tree removals, large tree removals (>28"DBH), priority removals (>25" DBH), and storm response) Tree Planting Site Prep
Stump Removal (inventory backlog)
Appendices | 169
City of Oakland Tree Services EQUIPMENT (ALL ACTIVITIES) Equipment Quantity
Chainsaw (Tree Pruning and Removal) 12
Aerial Lift (Bucket Truck) (55' and 75') (Tree Removal) 2 F550 with w/ Altec (AT37g) - 37' Aerial Lift (Tree Pruning) 2 Chipper (Tree Pruning and Removal) 4
Chipper Truck (Tree Pruning and Removal) 4
Knuckle Boom Truck Crane (Tree Pruning and Removal) 2
F700 Flatbed Dump Truck (Tree Removal) 2
F350 Dump Body (Pick-up Truck) 8
Stump Grinder (Tree Planting and Stump Grinding) 3
Pick-up Truck (All Activities) 14
Field Computer/Tablet (All Activities) 25
Water Tank 4
Staff Summary
Tree Trimmer 7
Tree Trimmer Crew Leader 3
Tree Supervisor I 6
Tree Worker 11
Park Attendant (Part-Time) 15
Arboricultural Inspectors 4
Administrative Analyst II 1
Tree Supervisor II 1
Administrative Assistant II 1
Program Analyst I (Urban Forestry Ambassador) 2
Total STAFF 51
170 | Appendices
APPENDIX B:
Plans, Studies, and Regulations
Standard Specifications for Street Tree Planting
The Standard Specifications for Street Tree Planting
serve as a reference to guarantee the proper
planting of trees in parks and along streets in the
City. These specifications establish standards for
several aspects, such as the location of the site
(including spacing, soils, and utilities), nursery
selection, planting techniques, and maintenance
procedures.
Oakland 2030 Equitable Climate Action
Plan (2020)
Oakland's Equitable Climate Action Plan (ECAP)
aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
build resilience for communities most affected by
climate change. The plan proposes funding for
proactive tree maintenance, increasing canopy
cover in frontline communities, and preserving
existing tree canopy. It also recommends tree
planting and community solar to support carbon
capture and emission reduction.
A review of select City of Oakland plans, studies, policies, and standards was conducted to identify ways to connect Oakland’s urban forest to past and current planning efforts and find opportunities for the Urban Forest Plan to help advance citywide and regional initiatives while supporting the care and growth of Oakland’s public trees. A summary of the plans and connections to Oakland’s trees is detailed below.
City of Oakland’s Municipal Code
The Oakland Municipal Code has 12 Titles that relate
to trees, with regulations covering various aspects
of tree management. Title 1 grants the Senior
Parks & Tree Division Supervisor the authority to
arrest those who violate the Municipal Code. Title 2
identifies the Department of Race & Equity as being
responsible for ensuring equal access to trees as
part of a healthy environment. Other Titles regulate
topics such as tree maintenance and pruning,
tree obstruction of visibility, tree preservation
during construction, and prohibiting the use of
neonicotinoid insecticides.
Appendices | 171
General Plan (under revision 2023)
The City of Oakland’s General Plan emphasizes
the importance of protecting and planting trees
as a key component of physical and economic
development. It includes specific actions,
development proposals, and guides for planning
and implementing programs. Several elements
recognize the significance of trees, including
expanding open space, promoting street trees,
preserving oak woodlands and redwood forests,
and using landscape plantings for noise mitigation
and scenic enhancement. The plan also encourages
green building practices and preserving green
spaces.
Oakland Vegetation Management Plan
(expected 2024)
Oakland has a history of wildfire that could
threaten its urban forest, including street trees. The
Draft Oakland Vegetation Management Plan (VMP)
is a 10-year plan aimed at reducing fire hazards
on City-owned land and wildfire hazards in the
Oakland Hills.
City of Oakland Green Stormwater
Infrastructure Plan (2019)
The Green Stormwater Infrastructure Plan aims to
reduce stormwater runoff and improve human and
watershed health, wildlife habitat, and community
aesthetics. The plan recommends using green
infrastructure and trees to support these systems,
which can promote tree health and improve
stormwater management, benefiting both human
and environmental health.
West Oakland Reforestation Plan (2013)
Tree advocacy groups, the City of Oakland, and
the Port of Oakland collaborated to increase
tree canopy cover and reduce greenhouse gas
emissions in West Oakland through tree planting,
maintenance, and community engagement efforts.
The West Oakland Reforestation Plan includes
recommendations to diversify the urban forest by
expanding the list of street trees, implementing
planting plans for major streets in West Oakland
and the MacArthur-Hoover neighborhood,
identifying suitable locations for additional tree
planting, and quantifying the costs of planting
and maintenance versus environmental benefits
over time.
172 | Appendices
City of Oakland, California, Citywide Sidewalk
Condition and ADA Survey (2007)
The Sidewalk Condition and ADA Survey inventoried
sidewalks and associated infrastructure citywide to
estimate the cost of repairs. The survey revealed
that nearly $80 million is required for infrastructure
repairs, with about 25% of repairs attributed to
tree conflicts, including ADA non-compliance and
sidewalk damage.
East Oakland Neighborhood Initiative
Community Plan (EONI) (2019)
The East Oakland Neighborhood Initiative (EONI)
Community Plan is a comprehensive plan created
to guide the physical, social, and economic
development of the East Oakland neighborhood.
The plan was created through a collaborative
effort involving community residents, businesses,
and government agencies. The plan includes
a vision statement, goals, and action items for
addressing issues such as public safety, housing,
economic development, and education. The plan
also includes strategies for improving the physical
environment, such as increasing access to parks
and open spaces, promoting green infrastructure,
and improving transportation.
Owning Our Air: The West Oakland Community
Action Plan (2019)
The West Oakland Community Action Plan (WOCAP)
strives to enhance the air quality and overall health
conditions in West Oakland, which have a history of
being inadequate. To achieve this goal, the WOCAP
recommends that the City of Oakland develop an
urban canopy and vegetation plan that identifies
areas where the urban forest can be expanded,
preserved, and maintained.
Appendices | 173
2017 Pedestrian Plan, Oakland Walks! (2017)
The Pedestrian Plan outlines objectives and
recommendations to enhance the pedestrian
experience in Oakland. To foster walkable
environments, the plan proposes the incorporation
of trees along pedestrian and bike paths to create
barriers that mitigate the effects of surrounding
urban features such as traffic, noise, and air
pollution, as well as to enhance visual appeal.
City of Oakland Bike Master Plan (2007)
The 2007 Bike Plan is a key part of Oakland's
commitment to become a more bike-friendly
community by building a comprehensive bikeway
network and promoting safety for bicyclists. To
ensure that new paved paths are environmentally
responsible, the plan recommends avoiding
disruption to sensitive habitats and the trees that
rely on them. Additionally, the plan recognizes the
important role of trees in promoting healthier air
quality and suggests planting trees along bike paths
to enhance the biking experience for all.
Sustainable Oakland Report (2016-17)
The 2016-17 Sustainable Oakland Report showcases
Oakland's progress towards sustainability
and highlights volunteer programs that have
contributed to tree plantings in the community. One
of the success stories featured in the report is the
Brookfield Greening and Growing Project, which
involved the removal of asphalt in the playground
to plant trees, native shrubs, and a fruit orchard at
Brookfield Village Elementary School.
174 | References
References
Endnotes
1. Portillo, G. (2020, May 7). The butterfly effect: What it is, characteristics and chaos theory. Meteorología en Red. https://www.meteorologiaenred.com/en/butterfly-effect.html
2. Manzotti, M. (2021, December 28). The best quotes on trees and forests. Ecobnb. https://ecobnb.com/blog/quotestrees-forests/
3. Cunningham, L. (2010). A state of change: Forgotten landscapes of California. Heydey.
4. Margolin, M. (Ed.). (1993). The Way We Lived: California Indian Stories, Songs & Reminiscences. Heyday.
5. Starr, K. (2005). California. Modern Library.
6. Anonymous. (2022). The planning history of Oakland. https://oaklandplanninghistory.weebly.com/index.html
7. Nowak, D. J. (1991). Urban forest development and structure: Analysis of Oakland, California. University of California, Berkeley.
8. Spruhan, P. (2006). A legal history of blood quantum in federal Indian law to 1935. South Dakota Law Review, 51, 1. https://ssrn.com/abstract=955032.
9. Bagwell, B. (2012). Oakland: The story of a city. Oakland Heritage Alliance.
10. Lewis Publishing Co. (1892, January 1). The bay of San Francisco: The metropolis of the Pacific Coast and its suburban cities: A history. https://archive.org/details/bayofsanfrancisc00lewi/page/n1/mode/1up
11. National Archives. (2021, June 28). The Great Migration (1910-1970). U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. https://www.archives.gov/research/african-americans/migrations/great-migration
12. Rumford, W. B., Henderson, J., Fry, A. R., & France, E. (1971, September 13). Legislator for fair employment, fair housing and public health: Oral history transcript / William Byron Rumford. Online Archive of California. https://oac. cdlib.org/view?docId=hb8n39p2g3&chunk.id=div00040&brand=oac4&doc.view=entire_text
13. Farmer, J. (2017). Trees in paradise: The botanical conquest of California. Heydey.
14. Marshall, A. S. (2017). East Bay hills: A brief history. The History Press.
15. Sæbø, A., Janhäll, S., Gawronski, S. W., & Hanslin, H. M. (2017). Urban forestry and pollution mitigation. In F. Ferrini, C. C. Konijnendijk van den Bosch, & A. Fini (Eds.), Routledge handbook of urban forestry (pp. 112-122). Routledge.
16. Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. (2021). CalEnviroScreen 4.0. California Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. https://oehha.ca.gov/calenviroscreen/ report/calenviroscreen-40
17. Nowak, D.J., Hirabayashi, S., Bodine, A., & Greenfield, E. (2014). Tree and forest effects on air quality and human health in the United States. Environmental Pollution, 193, 119–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2014.05.028.
18. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2014, June 17). Using trees and vegetation to reduce heat islands. https:// www.epa.gov/heatislands/using-trees-and-vegetation-reduce-heat-islands
19. Shah, A.M., Liu, G., Huo, Z., Yang, Q., Zhang, W., Meng, F., Yao, L., & Ulgiati, S. (2022). Assessing environmental services and disservices of urban street trees: an application of the emergy accounting. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 186, 106563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106563.
20. McDonald, R.I., Kroeger, T., Zhang, P. & Hamel, P. (2020). The value of U.S. urban tree cover for reducing heatrelated health impacts and electricity consumption. Ecosystems, 23, 137–150. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-019- 00395-5
References | 175
21. Ackerly, D., Jones, A., Stacey, M., & Riordan, B. (2018). San Francisco Bay Area summary report. California’s fourth climate change assessment. University of California, Berkeley, California, USA.
22. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2018, December 11). Heat islands. https://www.epa.gov/heat-islands
23. National Weather Service. (n.d.). Weather related fatalities and injury statistics. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency, National Weather Service. https://www.weather.gov/hazstat/
24. Anderson, G. B., & Bell, M. L. (2011). Heat waves in the United States: Mortality risk during heat waves and effect modification by heat wave characteristics in 43 U.S. communities. Environmental Health Perspectives, 119(2), 210– 218. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1002313
25. Kalkstein, L. S., Eisenman, D. P., de Guzman, E. B. & Sailor, D. J. (2022) Increasing trees and high-albedo surfaces decreases heat impacts and mortality in Los Angeles, CA. Int J Biometeorol, 66, 911–925. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00484-022-02248-8
26. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (2014, June 17). Using trees and vegetation to reduce heat islands. https:// www.epa.gov/heatislands/using-trees-and-vegetation-reduce-heat-islands
27. Kuo, F. E. (2003). The role of arboriculture in a healthy social ecology. Journal of Arboriculture, 29(3), 148–155.
28. Gilstad-Hayden, K., Wallace, L.R., Carroll-Scott, A., Meyer, S. R., Barbo, S., Murphy-Dunning, C., & Ickovics, J. R. (2015). Research note: Greater tree canopy cover is associated with lower rates of both violent and property crime in New Haven, CT. Landscape and Urban Planning, 143, 248–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.08.005.
Source 2: Troy, A., J.M. Grove & J.
29. O’Neil-Dunn, J. (2012). The relationship between tree canopy and crime rates across an urban–rural gradient in the greater Baltimore region. Landscape and Urban Planning, 106, 262–270.
30. Swift, P., Painter, D., & Goldstein, M. (1997). Residential street typology and injury accident frequency. Swift and Associates.
31. Ewing, R., & Dumbaugh, E. (2009). The built environment and traffic safety: a review of empirical evidence. Journal of Planning Literature, 23(4), 347-367.
32. Middleton, F. (2022, November 16). Oakland trees are dying faster than they can be planted, despite community efforts.
The Oaklandside. https://oaklandside.org/2022/11/16/tree-planting-oakland-ca-urban-forest-master-plan/
33. McPherson, E. G,. Xiao, Xl, Maco, S. E., VanDerZanden, A., Simpson, J. R., Bell, N., & Peper, P. J. (2002). Western Washington and Oregon community tree guide: Benefits, costs and strategic planting. Center for Urban Forest Research Pacific Southwest Research Station.
34. Johnson, Z. S., Koski, T., & O’Conner, A. (2017). The hidden value of landscapes: Implications for drought planning.
Colorado State University. http://webdoc.agsci.colostate.edu/hortla/Colorado_Water_2017.pdf
35. Sequoia Audubon Society. (n.d.). Bird species common to the San Francisco Bay urban areas and the plants that sustain them. http://sequoia-audubon.org/assets/BWH/Birds%20and%20Their%20Plants.pdf
36. Ulmer, J. A., Wolf, K. L., Backman, D. R., Tretheway, R. L., Blain, C. J., O’Neil-Dunne, J.P.M., & Frank, L.D. (2016) Multiple health benefits of urban tree canopy: The mounting evidence for green prescription. Health and Place, 42, 54-62.
37. Roe, J. J., Thompson, C.W., Aspinall, P.A., Brewer, M.J., Duff, E.I., Miller, D., Mitchell, R., & Clow, A. (2013). Green space and stress: Evidence from cortisol measures in deprived urban communities. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 10, 4086-4103.
38. Kim, K., Joyce, B. T., Nannini, D. R., Zheng, Y., Gordon-Larsen, P., Shikany, J. M., ... & Hou, L. (2023). Inequalities in urban greenness and epigenetic aging: Different associations by race and neighborhood socioeconomic status.
Science Advances, 9(26). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.adf8140
39. Donovan, G. H., Prestemon, J. P., Gatziolis, D., Michael, Y. L., Kaminski, A. R., & Dadvand, P. (2022). The association between tree planting and mortality: A natural experiment and cost-benefit analysis. Environment International, 170, 107609.
176 | References
40. Ellaway, A., Macintyre, S. & Bonnefoy, X. (2005). Graffiti, greenery, and obesity in adults: secondary analysis of european cross-sectional survey. British Medical Journal, 331, 611-2.
41. U.S. Department of Energy. (2019). Landscaping for energy-efficient homes. https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/ design/landscaping-energy-efficient-homes
42. U.S. Department of Energy. (n.d.) Low-income community energy solutions. Retrieved from https://www.energy.gov/ eere/slsc/low-income-community-energy-solutions
43. U.S. Forest Service. (2011). Trees pay us back in the Inland Empire Region. United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. https://www.fs.fed.us/psw/topics/urban_forestry/products/18/804uesd_uep_tpub_InlandEmpire.pdf
44. Standiford, R. B., & Scott, T. (2001). Value of oak woodlands and open space on private property values in Southern California. Forest Systems, 10(3), 137-152.
45. Wolf, K.L. (2005). Business district streetscapes, trees, and consumer response. Journal of Forestry, 103(8), 396-400. https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/city_trees_retail_wolf.pdf
46. Hughes, N. (2013, May 29). Trees mean business. California Urban Forests Council. https://investfromthegroundup. org/trees-mean-business/.
47. American Forests. (n.d.). Career pathways initiative. https://www.americanforests.org/project/career-pathways/
48. Hanks, A., Solomon, D., Weller, C. E. (2018, February 21). Systematic inequality: How America’s structural racism helped create the black-white wealth gap. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/ systematic-inequality/
49. Locke, D. H., Hall, B., Grove, J. M., Picket, S. T. A., Ogden, L. A., Aoki, C., Boone, C. G., O’Neil-Dunne, J. P. M. (2021).
Residential housing segregation and urban tree canopy in 37 US cities. NPJ Urban Sustainability, 1(1), 15.
50. O’Brien, L., De Vreese, R., Atmiş, E., Olafsson, A. Sievänen, T., Brennan, M., Sánchez, M., Panagopoulos, T., de Vries, S., Kern, M., Gentin, S. Saraiva, G., Almeida, A. (2017). Social and environmental justice: Diversity in access to and benefits from urban green infrastructure – examples from Europe. In D. Pearlmutter, C. Calfapietra, R. Samson, L.
O’Brien, S. K. Ostoić, G. Sanesi, R. A. del Amo (Eds.) The urban forest: Cultivating green infrastructure for people and the environment. (pp. 152-190). Springer.
51. Watkins, S. L. & Gerrish, E. (2018). The relationship between urban forests and race: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Management, 209, 152-168. https://urbanforestry.indiana.edu/doc/publications/2018-watkins-UFrace.pdf
52. Perkins, H. (2016). Urban forests are social natures: Markets, race, class, and gender in relation to (un)just urban environments. In L. A. Sandberg, A. Bardekjian, S. Butt (Eds.) Urban forests, trees, and greenspace: A political ecology perspective (pp. 19-34). Routledge.
53. Oakland Park Commission. (1910). The park system of Oakland. Caruth & Caruth.
54. Tarver Jr, G. W. (2015). Urban forestry in the streets: Intersection of agency, the Black Forest, and human consciousness in Oakland, California. University of California, Davis.
55. Van Herzele, A., Collins, K., Tyrväinen, L. (2010). Involving people in urban forestry. In C. C. Konijnendijk, K. Nilsson, T. B. Randrup, & J. Schipperijn (Eds.) Urban forests and trees (pp. 207-228). Springer.
56. Santamour, Jr, F. S. (1981). Diversity and stability of trees in the urban forest. Journal of Arboriculture, 7(10), 241–244.
57. CalEnviroScreen is a mapping tool created by the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) that helps identify California communities that are most affected by many sources of pollution and where people are often especially vulnerable to pollution’s effects. At the time of creation of the Urban Forest Plan, CalEnviroScreen is on version 4.0. Because this is a 50-year plan, references to CalEnviroScreen throughout refer to the current version of the time or to any new tool created to replace CalEnviroScreen.
References | 177
Call-out Boxes
AECOM. (2013). Financing San Francisco’s urban forest: The benefits + costs of a comprehensive municipal street tree program. San Francisco Planning Department.
Barreto, M., Reny, T., & Diaz, S. (2018). Should I stay or should I go: How effective transit-oriented development can lead to positive economic growth without displacing Latinos. University of California, Los Angeles.
Bay Area Equity Atlas. (2022). Indigenous populations of the Bay Area. https://bayareaequityatlas.org/about/indigenouspopulations-in-the-bay-area Bordne, M. & Johnson, C. (2020). Maps show the real picture of race and equity in Oakland. ESRI blog. https://www.esri. com/about/newsroom/blog/oakland-mapping-addresses-inequality/ Brisbane, A.S. & Lippman, T. W. (1989). Interstate 880, down and out in Oakland. Washington Post.
Dara, V. (2021). Top 10: The busiest container ports in the United States. Container News. https://container-news.com/ top-10-the-busiest-container-ports-in-the-united-states/ Eskew, G. T. (2010). From sit-ins to fish-ins: Broadening the American civil rights movement to include Native Americans and other minorities. Rikkyo American Studies, 32, 129–160.
Gómez-Van Cortright, G. (2022). How Indigenous People Got Some Land Back in Oakland. Bay Nature. https://baynature. org/2022/12/13/how-indigenous-people-got-some-land-back-in-oakland/ Jacobs, E. (2022). Foresters hope ‘assisted migration’ will preserve landscapes as the climate changes. National Public Radio. https://www.npr.org/2022/05/18/1098828128/foresters-assisted-migration-preserve-landscapes-climate-change Leff, M. (2016). The sustainable urban forest: A step-by-step approach. Davey Institute. https://www.itreetools.org/ documents/485/Sustainable_Urban_Forest_Guide_14Nov2016_pw6WcW0.pdf Marshall, A. S. (2017). East Bay Hills: A brief history. The History Press.
Nowak, D. J. (1993). Historical vegetation change in Oakland and its implications for urban forest management. Journal of Arboriculture, 19(5), 313-319.
Oakland Tribune. (1940). City ‘street’ tree program drawn. April 1st.
O’Hare, M. (2019). Spending time in nature boosts health, study finds. CNN Travel. https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/ nature-health-benefits/index.html
Orenstein, N. (2022). Oakland to return land rights to Indigenous group. The Oaklandside. https://oaklandside. org/2022/09/08/oakland-land-rights-indigenous-sogorea-te/ Perkins, H. (2016). Urban forests are social natures: Markets, race, class, and gender in relation to (un)just urban environments. In L. A. Sandberg, A. Bardekjian, S. Butt (Eds.) Urban forests, trees, and greenspace: A political ecology perspective (pp. 19-34). Routledge.
Rose, J. (2022). Revisiting how two Federal housing agencies propagated redlining in the 1930s. Economic Mobility Project. https://www.chicagofed.org/research/mobility/policybrief-federal-housing-programs-redlining Rothstein, R. (2017). The color of law: A forgotten history of how our government segregated America. Liveright Publishing.
Tarver Jr., G. W. (2015). Urban forestry in the streets: Intersection of agency, the Black Forest, and human consciousness in Oakland, California. University of California, Davis.
US Department of Energy. (n.d.). Energy efficient landscaping. https://www.energy.gov/energysaver/energy-efficientlandscaping.
USDA Office of Sustainability and Climate (2021). Climate Change Pressures in the 21st century. https://storymaps.arcgis. com/stories/9ee0cc0a070c409cbde0e3a1d87a487c.
West Oakland Environmental Indicators Project. (2019). Owning our air: The West Oakland community action plan. https://woeip.org/featured-work/owning-our-air/